Department of Trauma Services and Acute Care Surgery, Parkview Adult and Pediatric Level II Trauma Center, Parkview Regional Medical Center, Fort Wayne, IN.
Department of Anesthesiology and the Program in Trauma, R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;25(1):44-53. doi: 10.1111/acem.13307. Epub 2017 Nov 2.
Recent studies using advanced statistical methods to control for confounders have demonstrated an association between helicopter transport (HT) versus ground ambulance transport (GT) in terms of improved survival for adult trauma patients. The aim of this study was to apply a methodologically vigorous approach to determine if HT is associated with a survival benefit for when trauma patients are transported to a verified trauma center in a rural setting.
The ascertainment of trauma patients age ≥ 15 years (n = 469 cases) by HT and (n = 580 cases) by GT between 1999 and 2012 was restricted to the scene of injury in a rural area of 10 to 35 miles from the trauma center. The propensity score (PS) was determined using data including demographics, prehospital physiology, intubation, total prehospital time, and injury severity. The PS matching was performed with different calipers to select a higher percentage of matches of HT compared to GT patients. The outcome of interest was survival to discharge from hospital. Identical logistic regression analysis was done taking into account for each matched design to select an appropriate effect estimate and confidence interval (CI) controlling for initial vital signs in the emergency department, the need for urgent surgery, intensive care unit admission, and mechanical ventilation.
Unadjusted mortalities for HT compared to GT were 7.7 and 5.3%, respectively (p > 0.05). The adjusted rates were 4.0% for HT and 7.6% for GT (p < 0.05). In a PS well-matched data set, HT was associated with a 2.69-fold increase in odds of survival compared to GT patients (adjusted odds ratio = 2.69; 95% CI = 1.21-5.97).
In a rural setting, we demonstrated improved survival associated with HT compared to GT for scene transportation of adult trauma patients to a verified Level II trauma center using an advanced methodologic approach, which included adjustment for transport distance. The implication of survival benefit to rural population is discussed. We recommend larger studies with multiple trauma systems need to be repeated using similar study methodology to substantiate our findings.
最近使用高级统计方法控制混杂因素的研究表明,直升机转运(HT)与地面救护车转运(GT)相比,可提高成人创伤患者的生存率。本研究旨在采用一种方法学严谨的方法来确定在农村地区将创伤患者转运至已确认的创伤中心时,HT 是否与生存获益相关。
1999 年至 2012 年期间,通过 HT 转运的年龄≥15 岁的创伤患者(n=469 例)和通过 GT 转运的创伤患者(n=580 例)均限制在创伤中心 10 至 35 英里范围内的受伤现场。使用包括人口统计学、院前生理学、插管、总院前时间和损伤严重程度在内的数据确定倾向评分(PS)。使用不同的卡尺进行 PS 匹配,以选择与 GT 患者相比,HT 患者的匹配比例更高。感兴趣的结局是从医院出院时的存活。考虑到每个匹配设计,使用相同的逻辑回归分析来选择适当的效应估计值和置信区间(CI),以控制急诊科初始生命体征、紧急手术需求、重症监护病房入院和机械通气的需求。
与 GT 相比,HT 的未调整死亡率分别为 7.7%和 5.3%(p>0.05)。调整后的死亡率分别为 HT 组 4.0%和 GT 组 7.6%(p<0.05)。在 PS 匹配良好的数据集中,与 GT 患者相比,HT 患者的存活几率增加了 2.69 倍(调整后的优势比=2.69;95%CI=1.21-5.97)。
在农村环境中,我们通过先进的方法学方法,包括调整转运距离,证明与 GT 相比,HT 与成人创伤患者从现场转运至已确认的二级创伤中心的生存获益相关。讨论了对农村人口的生存获益的影响。我们建议使用类似的研究方法进行更大规模的、包含多个创伤系统的研究,以证实我们的发现。