An analysis of patients transported by a private helicopter emergency medical service in South Africa.

BACKGROUND A helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) is a specialist flying emergency service where on-board medical personnel have both the knowledge and equipment to perform complicated medical procedures. The paucity of literature describing the types of patients flown by HEMS in South Africa (SA) and their clinical outcome poses a challenge for current aeromedical services, as there is no baseline information on which to base flight criteria, staffing and policy documents. This has the potential to hamper the advancement of HEMS in SA. OBJECTIVES To undertake a descriptive analysis of patients flown by the Netcare 911 HEMS over a 12-month period in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) provinces, SA, and to assess patient outcomes. The clinical demographics of patients transported by the HEMS were analysed, time frames from dispatch of the helicopter to delivery of the patient to the receiving hospital determined, and patient outcomes at 24 hours and 72 hours analysed. METHODS The study utilised a retrospective quantitative, descriptive design to analyse patients transported by a private HEMS in SA. All complete records of patients transported by the Netcare 911 HEMS between 1 January and 31 December 2011 were included. RESULTS The final study population comprised 537 cases, as 10 cases had to be excluded owing to incomplete documentation. Of the 537 cases, 82 (15.3%) were managed by the KZN HEMS and 455 (84.7%) by the Gauteng HEMS. Adult males were the patients most commonly flown in both Gauteng and KZN (350/455 patients (76.9%) in Gauteng and 48/82 (58.5%) in KZN were males, and 364/455 patients (80.0%) in Gauteng and 73/82 (89.0%) in KZN were adults). Motor vehicle collisions were the most common incidents necessitating transport by HEMS in both operations (n=193, 35.9%). At the 24-hour follow-up, 339 patients (63.1%) were alive and stable, and at the 72-hour follow-up, 404 (75.3%) were alive and stable. CONCLUSION The study findings provided valuable information that may have an impact on the current staffing and authorisation criteria of SA HEMS operations.

[1]  D. V. van Hoving,et al.  A 5-year analysis of the helicopter air mercy service in Richards Bay, South Africa. , 2013, South African medical journal = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir geneeskunde.

[2]  S. Stratton Should helicopters dispatched for EMS trauma response be grounded? , 2013, Annals of emergency medicine.

[3]  Douglas J Floccare,et al.  Appropriate and Safe Utilization of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services: A Joint Position Statement with Resource Document , 2013, Prehospital emergency care : official journal of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the National Association of State EMS Directors.

[4]  Joshua B. Brown,et al.  Does helicopter transport impact outcome following trauma? , 2013 .

[5]  G. Perkins,et al.  Impact of introducing a major trauma network on a regional helicopter emergency medicine service in the UK , 2013, Emergency Medicine Journal.

[6]  E. D. L. de Lange-de Klerk,et al.  Helicopter Emergency Medical Services save lives: outcome in a cohort of 1073 polytraumatized patients , 2013, European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine.

[7]  P. Pronovost,et al.  Association Between Helicopter vs Ground Emergency Medical Services and Survival for Adults With Major Trauma , 2013 .

[8]  R. S. Moharari,et al.  Helicopter emergency medical service inTehran, Iran: a descriptive study. , 2012, Air medical journal.

[9]  M. Cudnik,et al.  Prehospital Factors Associated with Mortality in Injured Air Medical Patients , 2012, Prehospital emergency care : official journal of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the National Association of State EMS Directors.

[10]  T. Hardcastle The 11P's of an Afrocentric trauma system for South Africa - time for action! , 2011, South African medical journal = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir geneeskunde.

[11]  K. Willett,et al.  Is it the H or the EMS in HEMS that has an impact on trauma patient mortality? A systematic review of the evidence , 2010, Emergency Medicine Journal.

[12]  D. V. van Hoving,et al.  Comparison of mean on-scene times: road versus air transportation of critically ill patients in the Western Cape of South Africa , 2008, Emergency Medicine Journal.

[13]  E. Steyerberg,et al.  Helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS): impact on on-scene times. , 2007, The Journal of trauma.

[14]  S. Jain,et al.  Helicopter Emergency Ambulance Service (HEAS) transfer: an analysis of trauma patient case-mix, injury severity and outcome. , 2007, Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

[15]  Bryan E Bledsoe,et al.  Helicopter scene transport of trauma patients with nonlife-threatening injuries: a meta-analysis. , 2006, The Journal of trauma.

[16]  Bryan E Bledsoe,et al.  EMS myth #6. Air medical helicopters save lives and are cost-effective. , 2003, Emergency medical services.

[17]  T Martin,et al.  Aeromedical Transportation: A Clinical Guide , 1996 .

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

[19]  L. Jacobs,et al.  Impact of pre-trauma center care on length of stay and hospital charges. , 1989, The Journal of trauma.

[20]  C. Probst,et al.  Comparison of helicopter and ground emergency medical service: a retrospective analysis of a German rescue helicopter base. , 2012, Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine.

[21]  S. Jan,et al.  A systematic review of the costs and benefits of helicopter emergency medical services. , 2010, Injury.