Literature DB >> 8611068

Paramedic vs private transportation of trauma patients. Effect on outcome.

D Demetriades1, L Chan, E Cornwell, H Belzberg, T V Berne, J Asensio, D Chan, M Eckstein, K Alo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) play a major role in any trauma system. However, there is very little information regarding the role of prehospital emergency care in trauma. To investigate this issue, we compared the outcome of severely injured patients transported by paramedics (EMS group) with the outcome of those transported by friends, relatives, bystanders, or police (non-EMS group).
DESIGN: We compared 4856 EMS patients with 926 non-EMS patients. General linear model analysis was performed to test the hypothesis that hospital mortality is the same in EMS and non-EMS cases, controlling for the following confounding factors, which are not affected by mode of transportation: age, gender, mechanism of injury, cause of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and severe head injury. Crude, specific, and adjusted mortality rates and relative risks were also derived for the EMS and non-EMS groups.
SETTING: Large, urban, academic level I trauma center. PATIENTS: All patients meeting the criteria for major trauma.
RESULTS: The two groups were similar with regard to mechanism of injury and the need for surgery or intensive care unit admission. The crude mortality rate was 9.3% in the EMS group and 4.0% in the non-EMS group (relative risk, 2.32; P < .001). After adjustment for ISS, the relative risk was 1.60 (P = .002). Subgroup analysis showed that among patients with ISS greater than 15, those in the EMS group had a mortality rate twice that of those in the non-EMS group (28.8% vs 14.1%). After controlling for confounding factors, the adjusted mortality among patients with ISS greater than 15 was 28.2% for the EMS group and 17.9% for the non-EMS group (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe trauma transported by private means in this setting have better survival than those transported via the EMS system. Large prospective studies are needed to identify the factors responsible for this difference.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8611068     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1996.01430140023007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  40 in total

1.  Fluid resuscitation in prehospital trauma care: a consensus view.

Authors:  M Revell; K Porter; I Greaves
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  [First aid measures by bystanders at the place of accident: useful or dangerous?].

Authors:  Wolfgang F Dick
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2003-10-31       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  Prehospital care: do no harm?

Authors:  David Hoyt
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Acute traumatic injuries in rural populations.

Authors:  Corinne Peek-Asa; Craig Zwerling; Lorann Stallones
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 5.  Evaluation of emergency medical services systems: a classification to assist in determination of indicators.

Authors:  C MacFarlane; C A Benn
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.740

6.  Emergency medical services (EMS) versus non-EMS transport among injured children in the United States.

Authors:  Michelle M Corrado; Junxin Shi; Krista K Wheeler; Jin Peng; Brian Kenney; Sarah Johnson; Huiyun Xiang
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 2.469

7.  Prehospital emergency care.

Authors:  M Cooke; T Hodgetts; R Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-11-16

8.  Patient Characteristics and Temporal Trends in Police Transport of Blunt Trauma Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Elinore J Kaufman; Sara F Jacoby; Catherine E Sharoky; Brendan G Carr; M Kit Delgado; Patrick M Reilly; Daniel N Holena
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 3.077

Review 9.  [Preclinical management of multiple trauma].

Authors:  M Bernhard; M Helm; A Aul; A Gries
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.041

10.  Mode of arrival does not predict myocardial infarction in patients who present to the ED with chest pain.

Authors:  Scott G Weiner; John T Wu; Preety Bhatti; Jessica D Goetz
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2009-11-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.