ArticleAustralasian journal of ultrasound in medicine2020
Aeromedical retrieval for suspected appendicitis in rural and remote paediatric patients.
Article in Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine, 2020. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distribution and Accessibility of Hospital-Based Emergency Departments for Paediatric Patients in Rural and Remote Western Australia: A Geographic Analysis.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this paper was to describe the characteristics of paediatric patients who underwent an aeromedical retrieval within Australia (gender and Indigenous status) for suspected appendicitis between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2018 (4 years). By understanding these trends, we hope to further justify the need for point-of-care ultrasound training for clinicians working in rural and remote Australia.
methodParticipants included Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS) patients aged 0-18 years (inclusive) who underwent an aeromedical retrieval for suspected appendicitis within Australia. Data were collected and coded on each patient's inflight working diagnosis, using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) coding method. A combination of descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses was used in data analysis, with significance considered at <0.05.
resultsThere were 384 children with a working diagnosis of suspected appendicitis, including 191 (49.7%) males and 193 (50.3%) females, with 133 (34.6%) patients identifying as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (hereafter referred to as Indigenous) Australians. The aeromedical retrievals were from rural and remote locations to inner-regional or metropolitan hospitals, with an average distance flown of 339.0 (SD = 206.4) kilometres. The RFDS most frequently retrieved for acute appendicitis (n = 159; 41.4%), acute abdominal pain (n = 127; 33.1%), and unspecified appendicitis (n = 84; 21.9%). There were non-significant (P = 0.9) diagnostic differences between genders. Non-Indigenous patients were overrepresented, compared with Indigenous patients, in relation to a transfer with a diagnosis of acute appendicitis (P = <0.01), whereas Indigenous patients were overrepresented, compared with non-Indigenous patients, in relation to transfers with diagnoses of acute abdomen pain and unspecified appendicitis (P = <0.01).
conclusionA significant number of paediatric patients are aeromedically retrieved from rural and remote locations with a diagnosis of appendicitis or acute abdominal pain. Future research should consider whether training in abdominal point-of-care ultrasound reduces retrievals.
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.