Potential cardiac arrest - an observational study of pre-hospital medical response

Loss of life years due to unavailable helicopter emergency medical service: a single base study from a rural area of Norway

Background: Despite the potential benefits of physician-staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS), many dispatches to primary HEMS missions in Norway are cancelled before patient encounter. Information is sparse regarding the health consequences when medically indicated HEMS missions are cancelled and the patients are treated by a GP and ambulance staff only. We aimed to estimate the potential loss of life years for patients in these situations. Method: We included all HEMS requests in the period 2010-2013 from Sogn and Fjordane County that were medically indicated but subsequently cancelled. This provided a selection of patients, with the purpose of studying cancellations independently of the patient's medical status A multidisciplinary expert panel retrospectively assessed each patient's potential loss of life years due to the lack of helicopter transport and intervention by a HEMS physician. Results: The study included 184 patients from 176 missions. Because of unavailable HEMS, seven patients (4%) were anticipated to have lost a total of 18 life years. Three patients suffered from myocardial infarction, three from stroke and one from abdominal haemorrhage. The main contribution from HEMS care in these seven cases might have been rapid transport to definitive care. The probability of a patient losing life years when in need of HEMS evacuation was found to be 0.2%. Conclusion: During the four years period seven patients lost 18 life years. Lack of rapid transport seems to be the primary cause of lost life years in this specific geographical area. Key Points Knowledge about to what extent HEMS contributes to an increased survival and a better outcome for patients is limited. Compared to similar studies on life years gained the estimated loss of life years was minor when HEMS evacuation was unavailable in this rural area. The findings indicates that lack of rapid HEMS transport was the primary cause of the estimated loss of life years.

Effect of requiring a general practitioner at scenes of serious injury: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In Norway, each municipality is responsible for providing first line emergency healthcare, and it is mandatory to have a primary care physician/general practitioner on call continuously. This mandate ensures that a physician can assist patients and ambulance personnel at the site of severe injuries or illnesses. The compulsory presence of the general practitioner at the scene could affect different parts of patient treatment, and it might save resources by obviating resources from secondary healthcare, like pre-hospital anaesthesiologists and other specialized resources. This systematic review aimed to examine how survival, time spent at the scene, the choice of transport destination, assessment of urgency, the number of admissions, and the number of cancellations of specialized pre-hospital resources were affected by the presence of a general practitioner at the scene of a suspected severe injury.

METHODS

We searched for published and planned systematic reviews and primary studies in the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, OpenGrey, GreyLit and trial registries. The search was completed in December 2017. Two individuals independently screened the references and assessed the eligibility of all potentially relevant studies.

RESULTS

The search for systematic reviews and primary studies identified 5981 articles. However, no studies met the pre-defined inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSION

No studies met our inclusion criteria; consequently, it remains uncertain how the presence of a general practitioner at the injury scene might affect the selected outcomes.