Interfacility Ambulance Versus Helicopter Transport of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Patients: Outcomes, Observations, and Utilization.

Robert C Sterner, Nathaniel P Brooks
{"title":"Interfacility Ambulance Versus Helicopter Transport of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Patients: Outcomes, Observations, and Utilization.","authors":"Robert C Sterner, Nathaniel P Brooks","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) is a devastating event that can cause permanent loss of function or disability. Time to surgical decompression of the spinal cord affects outcomes and is a critical principle in management of tSCI. One of the major determinants of time to decompression is transport time. To date, no study has compared the neurological outcomes of tSCI patients transported via ground/ambulance versus air/helicopter.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This retrospective cohort study sought to assess the association of the mode of transport on the neurological outcomes of tSCI patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 46 ground transport and 29 air transport patients with tSCI requiring surgical decompression were collected. Outcomes were assessed by the change in American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade from admission to discharge. Additionally, the utilization of air versus ground transport was assessed based on the distance from the admitting institution.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the transport groups, there were no significant differences (P<i>P</i>  < 0.05) in patient demographics. Helicopter transport patients demonstrated higher rates of AIS grade improvement (<i>P</i>  = 0.004), especially among AIS grade A/grade B patients (<i>P</i>   = 0.02; <i>P</i>   = 0.02, respectively), compared to the ambulance transport group. Additionally, within the cohort of patients undergoing decompression within 0 to 12 hours, helicopter transport was associated with higher AIS grade improvement (<i>P</i>  = 0.04) versus the ambulance transport group. Helicopter transport was used more frequently at distances greater than 80 miles from the admitting institution (<i>P</i>  = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study suggests that helicopter transport of tSCI patients requiring surgical decompression was associated with improved neurological outcomes compared to patients transported via ambulance.</p>","PeriodicalId":94268,"journal":{"name":"WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin","volume":"123 2","pages":"88-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) is a devastating event that can cause permanent loss of function or disability. Time to surgical decompression of the spinal cord affects outcomes and is a critical principle in management of tSCI. One of the major determinants of time to decompression is transport time. To date, no study has compared the neurological outcomes of tSCI patients transported via ground/ambulance versus air/helicopter.

Objective: This retrospective cohort study sought to assess the association of the mode of transport on the neurological outcomes of tSCI patients.

Methods: Data from 46 ground transport and 29 air transport patients with tSCI requiring surgical decompression were collected. Outcomes were assessed by the change in American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade from admission to discharge. Additionally, the utilization of air versus ground transport was assessed based on the distance from the admitting institution.

Results: Among the transport groups, there were no significant differences (PP  < 0.05) in patient demographics. Helicopter transport patients demonstrated higher rates of AIS grade improvement (P  = 0.004), especially among AIS grade A/grade B patients (P   = 0.02; P   = 0.02, respectively), compared to the ambulance transport group. Additionally, within the cohort of patients undergoing decompression within 0 to 12 hours, helicopter transport was associated with higher AIS grade improvement (P  = 0.04) versus the ambulance transport group. Helicopter transport was used more frequently at distances greater than 80 miles from the admitting institution (P  = 0.01).

Conclusions: This study suggests that helicopter transport of tSCI patients requiring surgical decompression was associated with improved neurological outcomes compared to patients transported via ambulance.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创伤性脊髓损伤患者的设施间救护车与直升机转运:结果、观察和利用。
导言:创伤性脊髓损伤(tSCI)是一种可导致永久性功能丧失或残疾的破坏性事件。脊髓手术减压的时间会影响治疗效果,是治疗创伤性脊髓损伤的关键原则。运输时间是决定减压时间的主要因素之一。迄今为止,还没有研究比较过通过地面/救护车和空中/直升机转运的脊髓损伤患者的神经功能预后:这项回顾性队列研究旨在评估转运方式对创伤后脊髓损伤患者神经系统预后的影响:收集了 46 名需要手术减压的 tSCI 地面转运患者和 29 名空中转运患者的数据。结果通过美国脊柱损伤协会损伤量表(AIS)等级从入院到出院的变化进行评估。此外,还根据与入院机构的距离评估了空中转运与地面转运的使用情况:结果:与救护车转运组相比,转运组之间没有明显差异(PP P = 0.004),尤其是AIS分级A/B级患者(分别为P = 0.02和P = 0.02)。此外,在 0 至 12 小时内进行减压的患者队列中,与救护车转运组相比,直升机转运与 AIS 等级的提高相关(P = 0.04)。在距离收治机构 80 英里以上的地方,直升机转运的使用率更高(P = 0.01):本研究表明,与救护车转运患者相比,直升机转运需要手术减压的 tSCI 患者可改善神经系统预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development of Cervical Cancer Prevention Workshops for Hmong and Karenni Women Through a Community-Academic Partnership. Diary of an Orphaned Resident. Elsberg Syndrome: An Overlooked But Treatable Cause of Back Pain. Emergency Department Door to Discharge Times. Endocrine Abnormalities in Mosaic Trisomy 16 Adolescent: A Case Report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1