Profile and outcomes of patients transported to an accident and emergency department by helicopter: prospective case series.

OBJECTIVES To study the profile of airlifted patients and their outcomes after arrival at the hospital, and to evaluate the appropriateness of their prehospital care and the decision to use aeromedical evacuation. DESIGN Prospective case series. SETTING Accident and emergency department of a public hospital, Hong Kong. PATIENTS All patients transported to the department by a helicopter of the Government Flying Service from June 1998 through November 1998. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Demographic data, sources and locations of referral, clinical features, triage category, interventions used, and outcome. RESULTS A total of 186 patients were transferred by helicopter during the 6-month study period. The 101 patients who had been transferred from a rural hospital or clinic were older (mean age, 50 years versus 35 years), comprised more females (55% versus 26%), had a higher overall mortality rate (19.8% versus 3.6%), and had a higher hospital admission rate (91.1% versus 37.6%) than the 85 patients who had been airlifted from the scene of an emergency. Neurological disorders were the most common presentation among interfacility transfers (21.8%). Among the 85 scene transfers, limb injuries (32.1%) and heat illnesses (24.4%) were the most common reasons for helicopter transport. Most interfacility transfers were appropriate, but 34.1% of patients who had been transferred from the scene of the emergency were later discharged and 21.1% refused consultation. CONCLUSIONS Scene and interfacility transfers by helicopter have different patient profiles, and a substantial proportion of scene transfers may be inappropriate. Guidelines such as field triage and helicopter dispatch criteria need to be established.

[1]  J. Richardson,et al.  Helicopter transport of trauma victims: does a physician make a difference? , 1991, The Journal of trauma.

[2]  J. L. Sachs,et al.  Mayo Clinic's hospital-based emergency air medical transport service. , 1989, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[3]  A. Localio,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of helicopter EMS for trauma patients. , 1997, Annals of emergency medicine.

[4]  P. Cameron,et al.  Helicopter retrieval of primary trauma patients by a paramedic helicopter service. , 1993, The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery.

[5]  R. Falcone,et al.  Helicopter transport of patients to tertiary care centers after cardiac arrest. , 1999, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[6]  K. J. Rhee,et al.  Differences in air ambulance patient mix demonstrated by physiologic scoring. , 1990, Annals of emergency medicine.

[7]  G. Lindbeck,et al.  Aeromedical evacuation of rural victims of nontraumatic cardiac arrest. , 1993, Annals of emergency medicine.

[8]  O. Førde,et al.  Which groups of patients benefit from helicopter evacuation? , 1996, The Lancet.

[9]  J. Nicholl,et al.  Effects of London helicopter emergency medical service on survival after trauma , 1995, BMJ.

[10]  B. Gurland,et al.  A more cost-effective use of medical air evacuation personnel. , 1995, The American surgeon.

[11]  R. Low,et al.  Emergency air transport of pregnant patients: the national experience. , 1988, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[12]  M. Leicht,et al.  A 10-year experience in the use of air medical transport for medical scene calls. , 1998, Air medical journal.

[13]  A. M. Dalton,et al.  Helicopter doctors? , 1992, Injury.

[14]  D. Scott,et al.  Role of an emergency helicopter transport service in rural trauma. , 1987, Archives of surgery.