Premium
A Prospective Study of the Impact of Multiple Patient Transports on Care Provided during Aeromedical Transport
Author(s) -
Hooker Edmond A.,
Drigalla Dorian,
O’Brien Daniel J.,
Hignite Jodie
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
academic emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.221
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1553-2712
pISSN - 1069-6563
DOI - 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00047.x
Subject(s) - medicine , crew , glasgow coma scale , observational study , emergency medicine , trauma center , injury severity score , emergency medical services , air transport , medical emergency , injury prevention , poison control , retrospective cohort study , anesthesia , surgery , aeronautics , engineering , transport engineering
Objectives: The purpose of the current study was to determine reasons for multiple‐patient transports using a helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) and to observe for any negative impact on patient care caused by the presence of the second patient. Methods: The study was a prospective observational study of all two‐patient trauma transports (doubles) over a 12‐month period, from January 2004 through December 2004. The authors selected a sample of 20% of single‐patient transports (singles) from the same time period for comparison. Flight crews completed a study form after the flight. Information requested included Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and negative impact on care of the primary patient caused by transporting the secondary patient. Data were analyzed using Mann‐Whitney rank test and descriptive statistics. Results: There were a total of 59 double‐trauma transports. A total of 269 single‐trauma transports were identified for comparison. Although there was no statistically significant difference in GCS score or RTS (single vs. primary double), doubles never included the most severely injured trauma patients. The secondary patients from the doubles were the least severely injured. There were nine patients in whom the crew felt there was a negative impact from the second patient. Need for trauma center evaluation of the second patient and distance of transport were common reasons for double transports. Conclusions: Patients transported as doubles do not include the most severely injured trauma patients. In only a small percentage of doubles did the second patient have a perceived impact on care of the primary patient.