Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34294031›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021

Validity and risk factor analysis for helicopter emergency medical services in Japan: a pilot study.

Noriaki Yamada, Yuichiro Kitagawa, Takahiro Yoshida, Sho Nachi, Hideshi Okada, Shinji Ogura

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Noriaki YamadaDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan. hokken@go2.enjoy.ne.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-4714-5787
Yuichiro KitagawaDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.
Takahiro YoshidaDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.
Sho NachiDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.
Hideshi OkadaDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.
Shinji OguraDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Yanagido Gifu City, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.
Gifu University · JPShimane University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome emergency departments use triage scales, such as the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale and Japan Urgent Stroke Triage Score, to detect life-threatening situations. However, these protocols have not been used for aeromedical services. Therefore, we investigated the factors predicting these life-threatening situations in aeromedical services as a pilot study for establishing the protocol.

methodWe retrospectively evaluated helicopter emergency medical service cases from 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2020 at Gifu University Hospital using the mission records. We only evaluated cases dealing with suggested internal medicine issues. We excluded cases influenced by external factors such as trauma or cases that included hospital-to-hospital transportation, focusing only on prehospital care. We evaluated the validity of the medical emergencies based on the needs for emergency interventions and hospital admission and of the suggested diagnoses and associated risk factors.

resultA total of 451 cases were suitable for inclusion in the study. In the analysis for all emergency calls, 235 (52.11%) cases needed emergency intervention and 300 (64.4%) required hospital admission. The suggested diagnosis was valid for 261 (57.87%) cases. After the first assessment by emergency medical technicians, 75 cases were removed. Analysis after this first assessment found that 52.31% cases required emergency intervention, 70.26% needed admission, and the suggested diagnosis was valid for 69.41% of cases. In the analysis of emergency calls, the multivariate analysis of some key variables identified age, playing sports, and gasping as risk factors for emergency intervention. Hospital admission risk factors included being age only. The suggested diagnosis was valid only for sports situations. In the analysis after the first assessment by an emergency medical technician, risk factors for emergency intervention included being age being male, playing sports, and gasping, and those for hospital admission was being age, being male, and experiencing stroke symptoms and/or disturbance of consciousness. The suggested diagnosis was valid only for sports situations.

conclusionSome 'second' keywords/phrases predict medical emergencies. Therefore, the dispatch commander should gather these keyword/phrases to assess.

Indexed as

Air AmbulancesEmergency Medical ServicesAircraftFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansJapanMalePilot ProjectsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTriageHEMS dispatchPredictionValidity of dispatch

Identifiers

PMID34294031
PMCPMC8296691
OpenAlexW3186910658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.