Effectiveness of a "doctor-helicopter" system in Japan.
(25/99)
BACKGROUND: In Japan, helicopters have rarely been used for emergency medical services. The use of helicopters not only ensures rapid evacuation but may also serve to provide emergency management to patients with life-threatening injuries in the prehospital setting. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a Japanese helicopter-based emergency medical system including an onboard physician, particularly in terms of probability of survival. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of trauma victims, and calculated two estimates of PS--at the scene and on arrival at the emergency department--based on patient age, Injury Severity Score, and Revised Trauma Score. RESULTS: We identified trauma victims who had an ISS above 15 and were transported from the scene by helicopter. Excluding cardiopulmonary arrest at the scene, 151 cases were studied. Thirty-two patients had hemodynamic instability with systolic blood pressures below 90 mmHg, caused by hemorrhagic shock (29 cases) or obstructive shock (3 cases). Their PS values were 0.56 +/- 0.38 in the prehospital setting and 0.65 +/- 0.38 on arrival at the ED, representing a significant difference (P = 0.0003). Twenty-four of these patients survived, reflecting successful resuscitation during prehospital and ED management. CONCLUSIONS: A doctor-helicopter system was shown to improve probability of survival for life-threatening trauma in the Japanese emergency medical system. (+info)
Use of an air ambulance system improves time to treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction.
(26/99)
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to clarify whether a helicopter ambulance system (doctor helicopter system; DHS) could shorten the time interval to coronary intervention in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), in comparison with ground ambulance (GA). METHODS: The time from the emergency call to coronary angiography (CAG time) or to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI time), and the inhospital outcome were evaluated in 76 AMI patients. Twenty patients were transported by DHS, and the other 56 were by GA. RESULTS: Both CAG time and PCI time were significantly shorter in the DHS (98.8+/-29.2 min, and 169.6+/-57.4 min) than those of the GA (126.6+/-48.7 min, and 203.2+/-57.0 min; p<0.05) group. Inhospital mortality was lower in the DHS (5.0%) versus the GA (10.7%) group. CONCLUSION: Use of DHS shortened the time interval to coronary intervention and also improved the inhospital prognosis of AMI patients. (+info)
The impact of a new regional air ambulance service on a large general hospital.
(27/99)
BACKGROUND: Helicopter air ambulance crews are influenced in their selection of the destination hospital for their patients by several factors including: distance from the scene; facilities, on site specialties, and senior cover of the receiving hospital; and the proximity of the helicopter landing area to the emergency department (ED). Only a limited number of hospitals have landing sites adjacent to the ED from which patients can be taken directly into the department (primary landing sites). Helicopter crews will often elect to over fly hospitals that do not have primary landing sites because secondary land transfers will add delays in delivering patients. Birmingham Heartlands Hospital has an elevated helideck adjacent to the ED. In October 2003, the Warwickshire and Northamptonshire Air Ambulance (WNAA) service was launched; the hospital sits on the western periphery of the area served by the service. METHODS: Prospective data was collated on all patients brought by WNAA to Heartlands Hospital between 1 October 2003 and 31 August 2004. RESULTS: In the 10 month period after the launch of the service, the helicopter delivered 83 patients to the ED; 74 of these were "off patch". This additional workload generated 163 ward days, 19 operative procedures, and 85 intensive care unit, high dependency unit, or coronary care unit days. The direct costs of this additional workload approached 160,000 pounds sterling. CONCLUSIONS: In future discussions on the cost effectiveness of air ambulances, it will be important to consider both the direct and indirect costs to the receiving hospitals arising from the redistribution of emergency workload. (+info)
Monitoring in the field.
(28/99)
This review looks at the challenges faced when monitoring patients in the field environment. It is considered from the perspective of the UK Defence Medical Services and their experiences over the past 20 yr. The lessons learned are applicable to many other circumstances where a high standard of care, for a large spectrum of patients, is to be delivered in the most inhospitable conditions. The environmental influences on monitoring equipment such as extremes of heat, cold and altitude must be considered and dealt with. Minimal monitoring standards required by professional bodies have to be undertaken, but there is a need to exceed them to compensate for the untoward effects of hostile environments. Patient and machine variables monitored and their relative importance in the field are also explored. Varying field locations are illustrated and the types of monitoring required to care for patients in different areas of field units are discussed. Patient transfers and the particular difficulties encountered in the military context are also reviewed. Undertaking aeromedical evacuation is one of the most challenging environments in the field and the solutions required to undertake it are explored. These considerations are used to propose design requirements necessary to provide appropriate monitoring in all other field conditions. The standards set for carriage of equipment in the air and the testing required allowing compliance with the regulations in force in the UK, are outlined. Finally the importance of practitioner training to undertake these roles in the field is discussed. (+info)
A rural emergency medical retrieval service: the first year.
(29/99)
INTRODUCTION: We describe the first year of operation of a rural emergency medical retrieval service (EMRS), staffed by emergency medicine and anaesthetic consultants and providing air based retrieval of critically ill and injured patients from general practitioner led community hospitals in rural west Scotland. METHODS: Data were collected on all patients referred to the service, both those subsequently transported and those where transport by the service was not indicated, for a period of 1 year from 1 October 2004 to 30 September 2005. Data collected included information on demographics, physiology, and medical interventions. Detailed data were collected regarding advanced airway care and any complications relating to transfer. RESULTS: Forty patients were attended and advice was given on a further 21 patients. Twenty one of the 40 patients (53%) required rapid sequence intubation prior to transfer. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) for trauma patients was 26 (range 2-59). The median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score for all patients was 11 (range 2-37). CONCLUSION: Our data show a high level of acuity among this patient group and a need for advanced medical intervention to ensure safe transfer. (+info)
Feasibility of acute clinical trials during aerial interhospital transfer.
(30/99)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In rural America, patients are often first seen at a small community hospital and then transferred to a tertiary care center by helicopter for further care. If acute clinical research were feasible during the aerial interhospital transport, more patients might be enrolled in trials at a critical earlier stage. METHODS: Prospective data were collected for all aerial transfers of a university-based helicopter service from April 2005 to January 2006. Flight nurses were educated about stroke research and offered certification and participation. Data collected included patient characteristics and the availability of relatives to provide surrogate consent. RESULTS: All 12 flight nurses completed the institutional review board certification requirements and collected data on 215 transfers. Sixty-one patients had acute stroke or myocardial events (MIs). The median time from symptom onset to helicopter arrival at an outside hospital was 213 minutes (range, 90 to 2135) for ischemic stroke (n=12), 186 (45 to 1332) for intracranial hemorrhage (n=28), and 157 (47 to 1044) for MI (n=21). A relative was available in >74% of those transfers. A trial with a 4-hour window would permit enrollment of 67% of the ischemic strokes, 82% of intracranial hemorrhage cases, and 76% of MI patients. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials are feasible during aerial interhospital transport of patients. Flight nurses became successful investigators in clinical research and were exposed to potentially eligible patients with the ability to consent either directly or through surrogates. This approach could improve current clinical trial recruitment in rural areas, as well as permit testing of inflight ancillary interventions to improve outcome during patient transport. (+info)
High fidelity medical simulation in the difficult environment of a helicopter: feasibility, self-efficacy and cost.
(31/99)
BACKGROUND: This study assessed the feasibility, self-efficacy and cost of providing a high fidelity medical simulation experience in the difficult environment of an air ambulance helicopter. METHODS: Seven of 12 EM residents in their first postgraduate year participated in an EMS flight simulation as the flight physician. The simulation used the Laerdal SimMantrade mark to present a cardiac and a trauma case in an EMS helicopter while running at flight idle. Before and after the simulation, subjects completed visual analog scales and a semi-structured interview to measure their self-efficacy, i.e. comfort with their ability to treat patients in the helicopter, and recognition of obstacles to care in the helicopter environment. After all 12 residents had completed their first non-simulated flight as the flight physician; they were surveyed about self-assessed comfort and perceived value of the simulation. Continuous data were compared between pre- and post-simulation using a paired samples t-test, and between residents participating in the simulation and those who did not using an independent samples t-test. Categorical data were compared using Fisher's exact test. Cost data for the simulation experience were estimated by the investigators. RESULTS: The simulations functioned correctly 5 out of 7 times; suggesting some refinement is necessary. Cost data indicated a monetary cost of 440 dollars and a time cost of 22 hours of skilled instructor time. The simulation and non-simulation groups were similar in their demographics and pre-hospital experiences. The simulation did not improve residents' self-assessed comfort prior to their first flight (p > 0.234), but did improve understanding of the obstacles to patient care in the helicopter (p = 0.029). Every resident undertaking the simulation agreed it was educational and it should be included in their training. Qualitative data suggested residents would benefit from high fidelity simulation in other environments, including ground transport and for running codes in hospital. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to provide a high fidelity medical simulation experience in the difficult environment of the air ambulance helicopter, although further experience is necessary to eliminate practical problems. Simulation improves recognition of the challenges present and provides an important opportunity for training in challenging environments. However, use of simulation technology is expensive both in terms of monetary outlay and of personnel involvement. The benefits of this technology must be weighed against the cost for each institution. (+info)
The experience of Teesside helicopter emergency services: doctors do not prolong prehospital on-scene times.
(32/99)
BACKGROUND: The benefits of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMSs) attending the severely injured have been documented in the past. The benefits of doctors attending HEMS casualties have been demonstrated in particular in inner-urban and metropolitan areas. However, for UK regions with potentially less major trauma, concerns have been raised by ambulance services that a willingness of doctors to "stay and play" may lead to unnecessary delays on-scene without any additional benefit to the patient. AIMS: To identify factors that do prolong on-scene time, establish whether doctors "stay and play" on-scene compared with paramedics and document how often advanced medical skills may have to be used by HEMS doctors working outside the London HEMS environment. METHODS: Patient report form data were studied with regard to the number of and mean on-scene times of missions flown to (A) road-traffic collisions (RTCs), (B) other trauma calls (OTCs) and (C) medical emergencies. Trauma missions (categories A and B) were further subcategorised with regard to associated patient entrapment. Any advanced medical interventions (AMIs) performed by HEMS doctors were recorded and categorised. Finally, we looked at the difference in on-scene times for physician-paramedic partnerships (PPPs) and conventional paramedic crews (CPCs) for the above categories and subcategories. RESULTS: A total of 203 patient report forms were identified and examined. In all, 44.3% of missions were flown to RTCs with a further 44.3% for OTCs and 11.4% to medical emergencies. AMIs were performed by HEMS doctors in 34.1% of PPP missions, with a prehospital rapid sequence induction rate of 3.8%. Overall mean on-scene time was 25 min, with no difference for PPP and CPC missions. The mean on-scene time was prolonged by 6 min for RTCs (p = 0.006) and by 23 min for patient entrapment (p<0.001). No significant differences were found for the comparison between PPPs and CPCs in any of the subgroups A-C. However, there seemed to be a trend towards reduced on-scene times of PPPs for medical emergencies and patient entrapments. DISCUSSION: This study did not show any significant prolongation of mean on-scene times for PPP missions either overall or for any of the subgroups A-C. The fact that AMIs were performed in a large number of missions attended by HEMS doctors seems to further justify their current role in providing improved care at the roadside without leading to any delays in transfer to definitive care. (+info)