Cargando…

Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study

BACKGROUND: The utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in modern trauma systems has been a source of debate for many years. This study set to establish the true impact of HEMS in England on survival for patients with major trauma. METHODS: A comparative cohort design using prosp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beaumont, Oliver, Lecky, Fiona, Bouamra, Omar, Surendra Kumar, Dhushy, Coats, Tim, Lockey, David, Willett, Keith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7368476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32704546
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2020-000508
_version_ 1783560613899796480
author Beaumont, Oliver
Lecky, Fiona
Bouamra, Omar
Surendra Kumar, Dhushy
Coats, Tim
Lockey, David
Willett, Keith
author_facet Beaumont, Oliver
Lecky, Fiona
Bouamra, Omar
Surendra Kumar, Dhushy
Coats, Tim
Lockey, David
Willett, Keith
author_sort Beaumont, Oliver
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in modern trauma systems has been a source of debate for many years. This study set to establish the true impact of HEMS in England on survival for patients with major trauma. METHODS: A comparative cohort design using prospectively recorded data from the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network registry. 279 107 patients were identified between January 2012 and March 2017. The primary outcome measure was risk adjusted in-hospital mortality within propensity score matched cohorts using logistic regression analysis. Subset analyses were performed for subjects with prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale <8, respiratory rate <10 or >29 and systolic blood pressure <90. RESULTS: The analysis was based on 61 733 adult patients directly admitted to major trauma centers: 54 185 ground emergency medical services (GEMS) and 7548 HEMS. HEMS patients were more likely male, younger, more severely injured, more likely to be victims of road traffic collisions and intubated at scene. Crude mortality was higher for HEMS patients. Logistic regression demonstrated a 15% reduction in the risk adjusted odds of death (OR=0.846; 95% CI 0.684 to 1.046) in favor of HEMS. When analyzed for patients previously noted to benefit most from HEMS, the odds of death were reduced further but remained statistically consistent with no effect. Sensitivity analysis on 5685 patients attended by a doctor on scene but transported by GEMS demonstrated a protective effect on mortality versus the standard GEMS response (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95). DISCUSSION: This prospective, level 3 cohort analysis demonstrates a non-significant survival advantage for patients transported by HEMS versus GEMS. Despite the large size of the cohort, the intrinsic mismatch in patient demographics limits the ability to statistically assess HEMS true benefit. It does, however, demonstrate an improved survival for patients attended by doctors on scene in addition to the GEMS response. Improvements in prehospital data and increased trauma unit reporting are required to accurately assess HEMS clinical and cost-effectiveness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7368476
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73684762020-07-22 Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study Beaumont, Oliver Lecky, Fiona Bouamra, Omar Surendra Kumar, Dhushy Coats, Tim Lockey, David Willett, Keith Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Original Research BACKGROUND: The utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in modern trauma systems has been a source of debate for many years. This study set to establish the true impact of HEMS in England on survival for patients with major trauma. METHODS: A comparative cohort design using prospectively recorded data from the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network registry. 279 107 patients were identified between January 2012 and March 2017. The primary outcome measure was risk adjusted in-hospital mortality within propensity score matched cohorts using logistic regression analysis. Subset analyses were performed for subjects with prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale <8, respiratory rate <10 or >29 and systolic blood pressure <90. RESULTS: The analysis was based on 61 733 adult patients directly admitted to major trauma centers: 54 185 ground emergency medical services (GEMS) and 7548 HEMS. HEMS patients were more likely male, younger, more severely injured, more likely to be victims of road traffic collisions and intubated at scene. Crude mortality was higher for HEMS patients. Logistic regression demonstrated a 15% reduction in the risk adjusted odds of death (OR=0.846; 95% CI 0.684 to 1.046) in favor of HEMS. When analyzed for patients previously noted to benefit most from HEMS, the odds of death were reduced further but remained statistically consistent with no effect. Sensitivity analysis on 5685 patients attended by a doctor on scene but transported by GEMS demonstrated a protective effect on mortality versus the standard GEMS response (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95). DISCUSSION: This prospective, level 3 cohort analysis demonstrates a non-significant survival advantage for patients transported by HEMS versus GEMS. Despite the large size of the cohort, the intrinsic mismatch in patient demographics limits the ability to statistically assess HEMS true benefit. It does, however, demonstrate an improved survival for patients attended by doctors on scene in addition to the GEMS response. Improvements in prehospital data and increased trauma unit reporting are required to accurately assess HEMS clinical and cost-effectiveness. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7368476/ /pubmed/32704546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2020-000508 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Beaumont, Oliver
Lecky, Fiona
Bouamra, Omar
Surendra Kumar, Dhushy
Coats, Tim
Lockey, David
Willett, Keith
Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title_full Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title_fullStr Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title_short Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study
title_sort helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in england: a comparative cohort study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7368476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32704546
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2020-000508
work_keys_str_mv AT beaumontoliver helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT leckyfiona helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT bouamraomar helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT surendrakumardhushy helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT coatstim helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT lockeydavid helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy
AT willettkeith helicopterandgroundemergencymedicalservicestransportationtohospitalaftermajortraumainenglandacomparativecohortstudy