P Hilbert-Carius1, M F Struck2, V Hofer3, J Hinkelbein4, Th Wurmb5, M Bernhard6, B Hossfeld7. 1. Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensiv‑, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Bergmannstrost BG-Klinikum Halle gGmbH M Halle (Saale), Merseburger Straße 165, 06112, Halle (Saale), Deutschland. Peter.Hilbert@bergmannstrost.de. 2. Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivtherapie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR, Leipzig, Deutschland. 3. Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensiv‑, Notfallmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Bergmannstrost BG-Klinikum Halle gGmbH M Halle (Saale), Merseburger Straße 165, 06112, Halle (Saale), Deutschland. 4. Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Köln (AöR), Köln, Deutschland. 5. Sektion Notfall- und Katastrophenmedizin, Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland. 6. Zentrale Notaufnahme, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland. 7. Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Sektion Notfallmedizin, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Germany more than 110,000 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) missions are carried out annually. A considerable number of patients are ventilated during the flight. So far, structured surveys with respect to the ground transport from the helipad to the hospital facility and handover of ventilated patients in the emergency room (ER) are not available in the German-speaking HEMS system. The handover of ventilated HEMS patients in the ER (HOVER I study) explored the use of the helicopter ventilator and medical equipment during the transport from the hospital landing site to the ER. METHOD: After approval by the HEMS operators, emergency medical doctors and HEMS technical crew members (HEMS-TC) of 145 German-speaking HEMS bases were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey (period: 1 February 2018-1 March 2018). Each participant was only allowed to submit the survey once. RESULTS: Data of 569 participants were completely analyzed, with responses from 429 emergency physicians and 140 HEMS-TC (75% from Germany, 13% Switzerland, 11% Austria, 1% Italy and Luxembourg). The most frequent type of aircraft used was the Eurocopter (EC)/Airbus helicopter (H) 135 (60.5%) followed by the EC/H 145 (33%). The majority of the respondents (53%) principally used the helicopter ventilator machine for patient transport from the helipad to the ER, 38% used it depending on the circumstances and 7% never used it. Of the participants 52% always took the emergency backpack for patient transport to the ER, 43% depending on the situation and 5% never took it along. The availability of oxygen or a ventilator at the helipad was considered to be helpful (59% and 45%, respectively), obligatory (25% and 14%, respectively) but was also considered unnecessary by some participants (16% and 40%, respectively). The collection of the HEMS team by a hospital team at the helipad was rated as helpful (64%) or mandatory (19%), 12% considered it to be unimportant and 5% even disturbing. For most respondents (58.5%) the responsibility for the patient ended after a structured handover on reaching the internal hospital target area (e.g. the ER). CONCLUSION: The management of the handover of ventilated emergency patients in German-speaking HEMS is heterogeneously structured. Only approximately 50% of the participants frequently carried the helicopter ventilator and emergency equipment during patient transport to the ER. Depending on the situation, more than 90% of the respondents used the helicopter ventilator and emergency backpack during the transport. The collection of the HEMS team by a hospital team at the helipad was appreciated by the majority of participants. The use of the helicopter ventilator for patient transport to the ER needs to be explored in future studies. The study was registered at the Research Registry ( www.researchregistry.com ) under the following number: researchregistry2925.
BACKGROUND: In Germany more than 110,000 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) missions are carried out annually. A considerable number of patients are ventilated during the flight. So far, structured surveys with respect to the ground transport from the helipad to the hospital facility and handover of ventilated patients in the emergency room (ER) are not available in the German-speaking HEMS system. The handover of ventilated HEMSpatients in the ER (HOVER I study) explored the use of the helicopter ventilator and medical equipment during the transport from the hospital landing site to the ER. METHOD: After approval by the HEMS operators, emergency medical doctors and HEMS technical crew members (HEMS-TC) of 145 German-speaking HEMS bases were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey (period: 1 February 2018-1 March 2018). Each participant was only allowed to submit the survey once. RESULTS: Data of 569 participants were completely analyzed, with responses from 429 emergency physicians and 140 HEMS-TC (75% from Germany, 13% Switzerland, 11% Austria, 1% Italy and Luxembourg). The most frequent type of aircraft used was the Eurocopter (EC)/Airbus helicopter (H) 135 (60.5%) followed by the EC/H 145 (33%). The majority of the respondents (53%) principally used the helicopter ventilator machine for patient transport from the helipad to the ER, 38% used it depending on the circumstances and 7% never used it. Of the participants 52% always took the emergency backpack for patient transport to the ER, 43% depending on the situation and 5% never took it along. The availability of oxygen or a ventilator at the helipad was considered to be helpful (59% and 45%, respectively), obligatory (25% and 14%, respectively) but was also considered unnecessary by some participants (16% and 40%, respectively). The collection of the HEMS team by a hospital team at the helipad was rated as helpful (64%) or mandatory (19%), 12% considered it to be unimportant and 5% even disturbing. For most respondents (58.5%) the responsibility for the patient ended after a structured handover on reaching the internal hospital target area (e.g. the ER). CONCLUSION: The management of the handover of ventilated emergency patients in German-speaking HEMS is heterogeneously structured. Only approximately 50% of the participants frequently carried the helicopter ventilator and emergency equipment during patient transport to the ER. Depending on the situation, more than 90% of the respondents used the helicopter ventilator and emergency backpack during the transport. The collection of the HEMS team by a hospital team at the helipad was appreciated by the majority of participants. The use of the helicopter ventilator for patient transport to the ER needs to be explored in future studies. The study was registered at the Research Registry ( www.researchregistry.com ) under the following number: researchregistry2925.
Authors: Roy G Brower; Michael A Matthay; Alan Morris; David Schoenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Arthur Wheeler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-05-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ursula Beckmann; Donna M Gillies; Sean M Berenholtz; Albert W Wu; Peter Pronovost Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-02-26 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: M Westhoff; B Schönhofer; P Neumann; J Bickenbach; T Barchfeld; H Becker; R Dubb; H Fuchs; H J Heppner; U Janssens; T Jehser; O Karg; E Kilger; H-D Köhler; T Köhnlein; M Max; F J Meyer; W Müllges; C Putensen; D Schreiter; J H Storre; W Windisch Journal: Pneumologie Date: 2015-12-09
Authors: Darren Flynn; Richard Francis; Shannon Robalino; Joanne Lally; Helen Snooks; Helen Rodgers; Graham McClelland; Gary A Ford; Christopher Price Journal: BMC Emerg Med Date: 2017-02-23