David S Silver, Liling Lu, Vanessa P Ho, Arnav Mahajan, Sebastian Boland, Tamara Byrd, Kevin Li, Jamison Beiriger, Francis X Guyette, Andrew B Peitzman, Matthew D Neal, Joshua B Brown
{"title":"检查设施间紧急普通外科转移到第四中心的空中医疗运输。","authors":"David S Silver, Liling Lu, Vanessa P Ho, Arnav Mahajan, Sebastian Boland, Tamara Byrd, Kevin Li, Jamison Beiriger, Francis X Guyette, Andrew B Peitzman, Matthew D Neal, Joshua B Brown","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Regionalized care has increased interfacility transfers, particularly for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients requiring urgent, specialized care. Air medical transport (AMT) provides rapid transfer with critical care capabilities and is increasingly used for EGS, but its time-saving benefits remain uncertain. This study aims to identify the population of EGS patients undergoing AMT and the distance thresholds where AMT is faster than ground transport.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort and analyzed EGS patients transferred to our quaternary center from January 2021 to December 2023. Geospatial analysis was used to calculate transport distances, and linear regression assessed the association between transfer time and distance, identifying the threshold where the 95% confidence interval of AMT no longer overlapped with ground transport. We stratified the analysis by weather conditions and peak traffic times.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 1,713 EGS patients, with 26.4% undergoing AMT. Air medical transport patients were older and more frail and had higher in-hospital mortality rates (27.9% vs. 7.2%) compared with ground transport patients. The most common primary diagnosis for was unspecified sepsis, but AMT patients had more necrotizing soft tissue infections and gastrointestinal bleeds. Air medical transport became faster than ground transport at a threshold of 5.7 miles, increasing to 7.2 miles during adverse weather and 9.1 miles during peak traffic. A random-forest model identified peak traffic and patient sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score as key factors influencing AMT use. Sensitivity analyses showed that including transport priority and year as interaction terms increased the distance thresholds to 17.4 miles and above.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first study to examine AMT practice patterns in EGS and quantify distance thresholds for transport efficiency. Total transfer time and choice of transport mode are significantly influenced by weather conditions and peak traffic, highlighting the need data-driven triage protocols. Such protocols will improve timely decision making and optimize patient transfers.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Epidemiological; Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining air medical transport in interfacility emergency general surgery transfers to a quaternary center.\",\"authors\":\"David S Silver, Liling Lu, Vanessa P Ho, Arnav Mahajan, Sebastian Boland, Tamara Byrd, Kevin Li, Jamison Beiriger, Francis X Guyette, Andrew B Peitzman, Matthew D Neal, Joshua B Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TA.0000000000004672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Regionalized care has increased interfacility transfers, particularly for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients requiring urgent, specialized care. Air medical transport (AMT) provides rapid transfer with critical care capabilities and is increasingly used for EGS, but its time-saving benefits remain uncertain. This study aims to identify the population of EGS patients undergoing AMT and the distance thresholds where AMT is faster than ground transport.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort and analyzed EGS patients transferred to our quaternary center from January 2021 to December 2023. Geospatial analysis was used to calculate transport distances, and linear regression assessed the association between transfer time and distance, identifying the threshold where the 95% confidence interval of AMT no longer overlapped with ground transport. We stratified the analysis by weather conditions and peak traffic times.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 1,713 EGS patients, with 26.4% undergoing AMT. Air medical transport patients were older and more frail and had higher in-hospital mortality rates (27.9% vs. 7.2%) compared with ground transport patients. The most common primary diagnosis for was unspecified sepsis, but AMT patients had more necrotizing soft tissue infections and gastrointestinal bleeds. Air medical transport became faster than ground transport at a threshold of 5.7 miles, increasing to 7.2 miles during adverse weather and 9.1 miles during peak traffic. A random-forest model identified peak traffic and patient sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score as key factors influencing AMT use. Sensitivity analyses showed that including transport priority and year as interaction terms increased the distance thresholds to 17.4 miles and above.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first study to examine AMT practice patterns in EGS and quantify distance thresholds for transport efficiency. Total transfer time and choice of transport mode are significantly influenced by weather conditions and peak traffic, highlighting the need data-driven triage protocols. Such protocols will improve timely decision making and optimize patient transfers.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Epidemiological; Level III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004672\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004672","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:区域化护理增加了机构间的转移,特别是对于需要紧急专门护理的急诊普通外科(EGS)患者。空中医疗运输(AMT)提供了具有重症监护能力的快速转移,并越来越多地用于EGS,但其节省时间的效益仍不确定。本研究旨在确定接受AMT的EGS患者群体,以及AMT比地面运输更快的距离阈值。方法:我们进行了回顾性队列研究,分析了2021年1月至2023年12月转移到我们第四中心的EGS患者。利用地理空间分析计算运输距离,利用线性回归评估运输时间与距离之间的关系,确定AMT 95%置信区间不再与地面运输重叠的阈值。我们根据天气状况和交通高峰时间对分析进行了分层。结果:我们分析了1713例EGS患者,其中26.4%接受了AMT。空中医疗运输患者年龄较大,体弱多病,住院死亡率高于地面运输患者(27.9% vs. 7.2%)。最常见的初步诊断是未明确的败血症,但AMT患者有更多的坏死性软组织感染和胃肠道出血。空中医疗运输的速度比地面运输快,达到了5.7英里的阈值,在恶劣天气时增加到7.2英里,在交通高峰时增加到9.1英里。随机森林模型确定高峰流量和患者顺序器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分是影响AMT使用的关键因素。敏感性分析表明,将运输优先级和年份作为相互作用项将距离阈值提高到17.4英里及以上。结论:这是第一个在EGS中检查AMT实践模式并量化运输效率距离阈值的研究。总转运时间和运输方式的选择受天气条件和高峰交通的显著影响,突出了数据驱动的分流协议的必要性。这样的协议将提高决策的及时性并优化患者转移。证据水平:流行病学;第三层次。
Examining air medical transport in interfacility emergency general surgery transfers to a quaternary center.
Background: Regionalized care has increased interfacility transfers, particularly for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients requiring urgent, specialized care. Air medical transport (AMT) provides rapid transfer with critical care capabilities and is increasingly used for EGS, but its time-saving benefits remain uncertain. This study aims to identify the population of EGS patients undergoing AMT and the distance thresholds where AMT is faster than ground transport.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort and analyzed EGS patients transferred to our quaternary center from January 2021 to December 2023. Geospatial analysis was used to calculate transport distances, and linear regression assessed the association between transfer time and distance, identifying the threshold where the 95% confidence interval of AMT no longer overlapped with ground transport. We stratified the analysis by weather conditions and peak traffic times.
Results: We analyzed 1,713 EGS patients, with 26.4% undergoing AMT. Air medical transport patients were older and more frail and had higher in-hospital mortality rates (27.9% vs. 7.2%) compared with ground transport patients. The most common primary diagnosis for was unspecified sepsis, but AMT patients had more necrotizing soft tissue infections and gastrointestinal bleeds. Air medical transport became faster than ground transport at a threshold of 5.7 miles, increasing to 7.2 miles during adverse weather and 9.1 miles during peak traffic. A random-forest model identified peak traffic and patient sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score as key factors influencing AMT use. Sensitivity analyses showed that including transport priority and year as interaction terms increased the distance thresholds to 17.4 miles and above.
Conclusion: This is the first study to examine AMT practice patterns in EGS and quantify distance thresholds for transport efficiency. Total transfer time and choice of transport mode are significantly influenced by weather conditions and peak traffic, highlighting the need data-driven triage protocols. Such protocols will improve timely decision making and optimize patient transfers.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery® is designed to provide the scientific basis to optimize care of the severely injured and critically ill surgical patient. Thus, the Journal has a high priority for basic and translation research to fulfill this objectives. Additionally, the Journal is enthusiastic to publish randomized prospective clinical studies to establish care predicated on a mechanistic foundation. Finally, the Journal is seeking systematic reviews, guidelines and algorithms that incorporate the best evidence available.