Article

Helicopter transport: Help or hindrance?

Department of Surgery, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Current opinion in critical care (Impact Factor: 2.62). 12/2011; 17(6):596-600. DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e32834c5655
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Traumatic injury continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the year 2011. In addition, the healthcare expenditures and lost years of productivity represent significant economic cost to the affected individuals and their communities. Helicopters have been used to transport trauma patients for the past 40 years, but there are conflicting data on the benefits of helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) in civilian trauma systems. Debate persists regarding the mortality benefit, cost-effectiveness, and safety of helicopter usage, largely because the studies to date vary widely in design and generalizability to trauma systems serving heterogeneous populations and geography. Strict criteria should be established to determine when HEMS transport is warranted and most likely to positively affect patient outcomes. Individual trauma systems should conduct an assessment of their resources and needs in order to most effectively incorporate helicopter transport into their triage model.
Research suggests that HEMS improves mortality in certain subgroups of trauma patients, both after transport from the scene of injury and following interfacility transport. Studies examining the cost-effectiveness of HEMS had mixed results, but the majority found that it is a cost-effective tool. Safety remains an issue of contention with HEMS transport, as helicopters are associated with significant safety risk to the crew and patient. However, this risk may be justified provided there is a substantial mortality benefit to be gained.
Recent studies suggest that strict criteria should be established to determine when helicopter transport is warranted and most likely to positively affect patient outcomes. Individual trauma systems should conduct an assessment of their resources and needs in order to most effectively incorporate HEMS into their triage model. This will enable regional hospitals to determine if the costs and safety risks associated with HEMS are worthwhile given the potential benefits to patient morbidity and mortality.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Heather L Evans
  • Source
    • "This has resulted in a demand for higher quality of emergency preparedness , and time-efficient transportation of severely injured patients has attracted growing public interest. Many countries have implemented helicopter-based systems to strengthen the emergency response, and the potential benefits have been studied several times [2] [3]. Time gain and short-term mortality (up to 30 days) are the outcome variables most often applied in studies evaluating helicopter services against ground services [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: The first Danish Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) was introduced May 1st 2010. The implementation was associated with lower 30-day mortality in severely injured patients. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term effects of HEMS on labour market affiliation and mortality of trauma patients. Methods: Prospective, observational study with a maximum follow-up time of 4.5 years. Trauma patients from a 5-month period prior to the implementation of HEMS (pre-HEMS) were compared with patients from the first 12 months after implementation (post-HEMS). All analyses were adjusted for sex, age and Injury Severity Score. Results: Of the total 1994 patients, 1790 were eligible for mortality analyses and 1172 (n=297 pre-HEMS and n=875 post-HEMS) for labour market analyses. Incidence rates of involuntary early retirement or death were 2.40 per 100 person-years pre-HEMS and 2.00 post-HEMS; corresponding to a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.72 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-1.17; p=0.18). The HR of involuntary early retirement was 0.79 (95% CI 0.44-1.43; p=0.43). The prevalence of reduced work ability after three years were 21.4% vs. 17.7%, odds ratio (OR)=0.78 (CI 0.53-1.14; p=0.20). The proportions of patients on social transfer payments at least half the time during the three-year period were 30.5% vs. 23.4%, OR=0.68 (CI 0.49-0.96; p=0.03). HR for mortality was 0.92 (CI 0.62-1.35; p=0.66). Conclusions: The implementation of HEMS was associated with a significant reduction in time on social transfer payments. No significant differences were found in involuntary early retirement rate, long-term mortality, or work ability.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2015 · Injury
  • Source
    • "Secondly, HEMS medical crew members are supposed to be more experienced in trauma management improving preclinical treatment of traumatised patients [8] [9]. At least, improved triaging is suggested to result in transportation to a specialist trauma centre avoiding inter-hospital transfers [10]. Despite these expected beneficial aspects, the effects of HEMS transport on posttraumatic outcome also revealed varying results [5]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) has been established in the preclinical treatment of multiple traumatised patients despite an ongoing controversy towards the potential benefit. Celebrating the 20th anniversary of TraumaRegister DGU® of the German Trauma Society (DGU) the presented study intended to provide an overview of HEMS rescue in Germany over the last 10 years analysing the potential beneficial impact of a nationwide helicopter rescue in multiple traumatised patients. Patients and methods We analysed TraumaRegister DGU® including multiple traumatised patients (ISS ≥16) between 2002 and 2012. In-hospital mortality was defined as main outcome. An adjusted, multivariate regression with 13 confounders was performed to evaluate the potential survival benefit. Results 42,788 patients were included in the present study. 14,275 (33.4%) patients were rescued by HEMS and 28,513 (66.6%) by GEMS. Overall, 66.8% (n = 28,569) patients were transported to a level I trauma centre and 28.2% (n = 12,052) to a level II trauma centre. Patients rescued by HEMS sustained a higher injury severity compared to GEMS (ISS HEMS: 29.5 ± 12.6 vs. ISS GEMS: 27.5 ± 11.8). Helicopter rescue teams performed more on-scene interventions, and mission times were increased in HEMS rescue (HEMS: 77.2 ± 28.7 min. vs. GEMS: 60.9 ± 26.9 min.). Linear regression analysis revealed that the frequency of HEMS rescue has decreased significantly between 2002 and 2012. In case of transportation to level I trauma centres a decrease of 1.7% per year was noted (p < 0.001) while a decline of 1.6% per year (p < 0.001) was measured for level II trauma centre admissions. According to multivariate logistic regression HEMS was proven a positive independent survival predictor between 2002 and 2012 (OR 0.863; 95%-CI 0.800–0.930; Nagelkerkes-R2 0.539) with only little differences between each year. Conclusions This study was able to prove an independent survival benefit of HEMS in multiple traumatised patients during the last 10 years. Despite this fact, a constant decline of HEMS rescue missions was found in multiple trauma patients due to unknown reasons. We concluded that HEMS should be used more often in case of trauma in order to guarantee the proven benefit for multiple traumatised patients.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2014 · Injury
  • Source
    • "In the present study, we also find that the impact of aging population on National Health Insurance is underestimated. Therefore, appropriate selection of patients by referring physicians and maintenance of good physician-patient rapport are important when the projected outcome is an issue [13, 14]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: EAMT in Taiwan has experienced increasing demand in the past few years. The objective is to analyze the trend of EAMT in the past six years and mortality rate within three days of patients undergoing interfacility transport in Taiwan. Material and method: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who were airlifted from remote islands to main island between 2006 and 2011. Main outcome measures are EAMT number (EAMT-N), EAMT per thousand population (EAMT frequency, EAMT-F), number of mortality (Mor-N), and mortality rate within three days after EAMT (Mor-R). Results and discussion: Overall mortality rate is 7.54% in 1684 airlifted patients. Acute myocardial infarction (AMI, 26.3%) and traumatic brain injury (TBI, 25.8%) comprise the majority in diagnosis (52.1%). However, Mor-R in these two categories is significantly low in AMI (3.5%) and TBI (5.1%). Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that physician density is not related to EAMT-N but to physician number. As general population ages (10%), the average age of patient who underwent EAMT doubled (21%). This study also leaves room for discussion regarding futile medical care. The results can be used as a reference for increasing utilization of EAMT in current National Health Care Scheme.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2014 · BioMed Research International
Show more