...
首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >COMPARISON OF HELICOPTER EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES TRANSPORT TYPES AND DELAYS ON PATIENT OUTCOMES AT TWO LEVEL I TRAUMA CENTERS
【24h】

COMPARISON OF HELICOPTER EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES TRANSPORT TYPES AND DELAYS ON PATIENT OUTCOMES AT TWO LEVEL I TRAUMA CENTERS

机译:直升机应急医疗服务运输类型及延迟对患者成果的延迟Trauma Centers

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) have become an engrained component of trauma systems. In Ontario, transportation for trauma patients is through one of three ways: scene call, modified scene call, or interfacility transfer. We hypothesize that differences exist between these types of transports in both patient demographics and patient outcomes. This study compares the characteristics of patients transported by each of these methods to two level 1 trauma centers and assesses for any impact on morbidity or mortality. As a secondary outcome reasons for delay were identified. Methods: A local trauma registry was used to identify and abstract data for all patients transported to two trauma centers by HEMS over a 36-month period. Further chart abstraction using the HEMS patient care reports was done to identify causes of delay during HEMS transport. Results: During the study period HEMS transferred a total of 911 patients of which 139 were scene calls, 333 were modified scene calls and 439 were interfacility transfers. Scene calls had more patients with an ISS of less than 15 and had more patients discharged home from the ED. Modified scene calls had more patients with an ISS greater than 25. The most common delays that were considered modifiable included the sending physician doing a procedure, waiting to meet a land EMS crew, delays for diagnostic imaging and confirming disposition or destination. Conclusions: Differences exist between the types of transports done by HEMS for trauma patients. Many identified reasons for delay to HEMS transport are modifiable and have practical solutions. Future research should focus on solutions to identified delays to HEMS transport.
机译:背景:直升机紧急医疗服务(HEMS)已成为创伤系统的诱发组成部分。在安大略省,创伤患者的运输是通过三种方式之一:场景呼叫,改进的场景呼叫或接口转移。我们假设患者人口统计数据和患者结果中的这些类型的运输之间存在差异。该研究将每种方法运输的患者的特征与两级1级创伤中心进行比较,并评估对发病率或死亡率的任何影响。确定延迟的次要结果原因。方法:用于通过36个月的36个月内通过HEMS识别本地创伤登记处的鉴定和抽象数据,所有患者通过HEMS运送到两个创伤中心。使用HEMS患者护理报告的进一步图表抽象是为了识别下摆运输过程中延迟的原因。结果:研究期间,HEMS转移了911名患者,其中139名是场景呼叫,333个被修改的场景呼叫,439例是接口转移。场景呼叫有更多的患者,ISS的患者少于15名,并且更多的病人从ED中排出回家。修改的场景呼叫有更多患者的患者大于25.被认为可修改的最常见的延误包括送医生进行程序,等待达到土地EMS机组人员,延迟诊断成像和确认处置或目的地。结论:创伤患者枯草凋亡类型之间存在差异。许多所确定的延迟延迟运输的原因是可修改的并且具有实用的解决方案。未来的研究应专注于确定延迟到下摆运输的解决方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号