Jain Trevor, Sibley Aaron, Stryhn Henrik, Hubloue Ives
1Division of Paramedicine,University of Prince Edward Island,Charlottetown,Prince Edward Island,Canada.
2Department of Health Management,University of Prince Edward Island,Charlottetown,Prince Edward Island,Canada.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018 Aug;33(4):375-380. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X18000559. Epub 2018 Jul 13.
IntroductionThe proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology has the potential to change the way medical incident commanders (ICs) respond to mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) in triaging victims. The aim of this study was to compare UAV technology to standard practice (SP) in triaging casualties at an MCI.
A randomized comparison study was conducted with 40 paramedic students from the Holland College Paramedicine Program (Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada). Using a simulated motor vehicle collision (MVC) with moulaged casualties, iterations of 20 students were used for both a day and a night trial. Students were randomized to a UAV or a SP group. After a brief narrative, participants either entered the study environment or used UAV technology where total time to triage completion, GREEN casualty evacuation, time on scene, triage order, and accuracy were recorded.
A statistical difference in the time to completion of 3.63 minutes (95% CI, 2.45 min-4.85 min; P=.002) during the day iteration and a difference of 3.49 minutes (95% CI, 2.08 min-6.06 min; P=.002) for the night trial with UAV groups was noted. There was no difference found in time to GREEN casualty evacuation, time on scene, or triage order. One-hundred-percent accuracy was noted between both groups.
This study demonstrated the feasibility of using a UAV at an MCI. A non-clinical significant difference was noted in total time to completion between both groups. There was no increase in time on scene by using the UAV while demonstrating the feasibility of remotely triaging GREEN casualties prior to first responder arrival.Jain T, Sibley A, Stryhn H, Hubloue I.Comparison of unmanned aerial vehicle technologyassisted triage versus standard practice in triaging casualties by paramedic students in a mass-casualty incident scenario. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(4):375-380.
引言
无人机(UAV)技术的普及有可能改变医疗事件指挥官(IC)在对大规模伤亡事件(MCI)受害者进行分诊时的应对方式。本研究的目的是在MCI中对伤亡人员进行分诊时,将无人机技术与标准做法(SP)进行比较。
对来自荷兰学院护理专业项目(加拿大爱德华王子岛夏洛特敦)的40名护理专业学生进行了一项随机对照研究。使用模拟机动车碰撞(MVC)及模拟伤亡人员,20名学生的轮次用于白天和夜间试验。学生被随机分为无人机组或标准做法组。经过简短叙述后,参与者要么进入研究环境,要么使用无人机技术,记录分诊完成总时间、绿色伤员疏散时间、现场停留时间、分诊顺序和准确性。
白天试验中,无人机组完成时间有3.63分钟的统计学差异(95%CI,2.45分钟 - 4.85分钟;P = 0.002),夜间试验差异为3.49分钟(95%CI,2.08分钟 - 6.06分钟;P = 0.002)。绿色伤员疏散时间、现场停留时间或分诊顺序未发现差异。两组的准确率均为100%。
本研究证明了在MCI中使用无人机的可行性。两组在完成总时间上存在非临床显著差异。使用无人机未增加现场停留时间,同时证明了在急救人员到达之前对绿色伤员进行远程分诊的可行性。
贾恩T、西布利A、斯特林H、胡布洛I。在大规模伤亡事件场景中,护理专业学生使用无人机技术辅助分诊与标准做法对伤亡人员进行分诊的比较。院前灾难医学。2018;33(4):375 - 380。