Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Air Med J ; 32(3): 144-52, 2013.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23632223

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI), time to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an important factor in saving myocardium. Helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) has become a vital component in regionalized cardiac care. The objective of this study is to assess the logistics of HEMS and ground EMS for interfacility transport of STEMI patients for primary PCI and to determine the effectiveness of HEMS transports in terms of the number of lives saved per 100 flights. METHODS: This is a retrospective database and records review of interfacility transports of STEMI patients for primary PCI to a single medical center. The study period consisted of 18 months (January 2010 through June 2011). RESULTS: Ninety-seven of 120 patients met the criteria for review. Of these, 66% were transported by HEMS. The pretransport patient handling times were similar for the HEMS and ground EMS groups. Door-to-PCI in < 120 minutes was achieved in 35.5% (11 of 31) of ground EMS and 24.2% (16 of 66) of HEMS. Patients transported by ground EMS were more likely to get to PCI in < 90 minutes (9.7%, 3 of 31). HEMS patients traveled significantly farther distances, 51 miles (IQR 43-68) than ground EMS, 37 miles (IQR 18-51). This equates to a 38% longer distance for patients transported by HEMS. An estimate of the driving time for HEMS-transported patients suggests HEMS transports saved a median of 41 minutes (IQR 33-48). The proportion of HEMS flights saving more than 30 minutes was 78.8% (95% CI 67.0-87.9%). CONCLUSION: The results did not show a time savings for HEMS- versus ground EMS-transported patients. When estimates of time spent for ground EMS of actual HEMS transported patients are analyzed, HEMS provides a median savings of 41 minutes, with a savings of at least 30 minutes in 78.8% of the HEMS patients. Based on estimates used in this study, conservative calculations arrived at a time-based mortality effectiveness of HEMS of about 1.2 lives saved per 100 flights.


Assuntos
Resgate Aéreo/estatística & dados numéricos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Tempo para o Tratamento , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Eficiência , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Estudos Retrospectivos
2.
Emerg Med Int ; 2012: 876703, 2012.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22288016

RESUMO

Helicopter EMS (HEMS) and its possible association with outcomes improvement continues to be a subject of discussion. As is the case with other scientific discourse, debate over HEMS usefulness should be framed around an evidence-based assessment of the relevant literature. In an effort to facilitate the academic pursuit of assessment of HEMS utility, in late 2000 the National Association of EMS Physicians' (NAEMSP) Air Medical Task Force prepared annotated bibliographies of the HEMS-related outcomes literature. As a result of that work, two review articles, one covering HEMS use in nontrauma and the other in trauma, published in 2002 in Prehospital Emergency Care surveyed HEMS outcomes-related literature published between 1980 and mid-2000. The project was extended with two subsequent reviews covering the literature through 2006. This review continues the series, outlining outcomes-associated HEMS literature for the three-year period 2007 through the first half of 2011.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA