Ground Same Intratransport Efficacy as Air for Acute Aortic Diseases

Air Med J. 2019 May-Jun;38(3):188-194. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Feb 12.

Abstract

Introduction: Patients with acute aortic diseases (AAoD) usually require transfer to tertiary centers for possible surgical care, for which intratransport management represents important continuing spectrum of care. There is little information comparing intratransport efficacy of air (ART) vs ground transport (GRT), nor how effectively they manage these patients' pain. Our study aims to compare how effective ART and GRT manage patients' intratransport HR, pressure.

Methods: Charts were reviewed of adult patients interhospital transferred to a quaternary academic center (UMMC) between 01/01/2011 and 09/30/2015. Outcomes were percentages of patients achieving target hemodynamic parameters, mortality.

Results: We analyzed 226 patients, 58 (26%) transported by Air and 102 (45%) type A dissection. Ground transport was associated with higher percentage of patients with target HR 60-80 bpm comparing to ART (58% vs 43%, 95% CI 0.3-0.99). Both ART and GRT were associated with similar frequencies of patients achieving target SBP and adequate pain control. Time intervals from transfer request to surgery, and mortality were similar for both types of transport.

Conclusion: Ground transport teams were more successful at achieving predefined target heart rate than Air transport. Intra-transport management of other vital signs and pain were equally effectively between both Air and Ground transport.

MeSH terms

  • Acute Disease
  • Air Ambulances* / statistics & numerical data
  • Ambulances* / statistics & numerical data
  • Aortic Diseases / therapy*
  • Emergency Medical Services / methods
  • Emergency Medical Services / statistics & numerical data
  • Female
  • Heart Rate
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Patient Transfer* / methods
  • Patient Transfer* / statistics & numerical data
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Time Factors