ArticleThe journal of trauma and acute care surgery2019
Defining geographic emergency medical services coverage in trauma systems.
Article in The journal of trauma and acute care surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGeographic distribution of trauma system resources including trauma centers and helicopter bases correlate with outcomes. However, ground emergency medical services (EMS) coverage is dynamic and more difficult to quantify. Our objective was to evaluate measures that describe ground EMS coverage in trauma systems and correlate with outcome.
methodsTrauma system resources in Pennsylvania were mapped. Primary outcome was county age-adjusted transportation injury fatality rate. Measures of county EMS coverage included average distance to the nearest trauma center, number of basic life support and advanced life support units/100 square miles, distance differential between the nearest trauma center and nearest helicopter base, and nearest neighbor ratio (dispersed or clustered geographic pattern of agencies). Spatial-lag regression determined association between fatality rates and these measures, adjusted for prehospital time, Injury Severity Score, and socioeconomic factors. Relative importance of these measures was determined by assessing the loss in R value from the full model by removing each measure. A Geographic Emergency Medical Services Index (GEMSI) was created based on these measures for each county.
resultsMedian fatality rate was higher in counties with fewer trauma system resources. Decreasing distance to nearest trauma center, increasing advanced life support units/100 square miles, greater distance reduction due to helicopter bases, and dispersed geographic pattern of county EMS agencies were associated with lower fatality rates. The GEMSI ranged from -6.6 to 16.4 and accounted for 49% of variation in fatality rates. Adding an EMS agency to a single county that produced a dispersed pattern of EMS coverage reduced predicted fatality rate by 6%, while moving a helicopter base into the same county reduced predicted fatality rate by 22%.
conclusionThe GEMSI uses several measures of ground EMS coverage and correlates with outcome. This tool may be used to describe and compare ground EMS coverage across trauma system geographies, as well as help optimize the geographic distribution of trauma system resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Ecological study, level IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.