ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025
Helicopter emergency medical services in Eastern Iran: a 4-year cross-sectional study of time intervals and mission profiles.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors for adverse incidents in patients during helicopter emergency medical services transports: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of helicopter emergency medical services base operating regime (24 h vs. 07:00-20:00) on mission volume and structure in Poland: a cross-sectional-longitudinal analysis with duty-time standardization (10 March-10 August 2025).BMC health services research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAir medical transport services play a significant role in emergency situations by providing timely transfers of critically ill patients to medical facilities. This study aimed to investigate the mission characteristics of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) and the associated time intervals in a geographically remote region of eastern Iran. We also compared the prehospital times of HEMS and ground transportation to determine whether dispatching a helicopter is time-efficient.
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the prehospital emergency medical center in Gonabad, a remote area in eastern Iran. Data were collected using standardized electronic forms developed by the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) in Iran. We analyzed the mission profiles and prehospital time intervals for all Gonabad HEMS missions conducted between 2021 and 2024. The mean activation time was compared to the national benchmark of three minutes, and the prehospital time intervals of air ambulances were compared to those of ground ambulances.
resultsFrom 2021 to 2024, there were 252 HEMS missions, transporting 265 patients. Of all 252 missions, 95 (37.7%) were primary missions, and 157 (62.3%) were secondary missions. The most frequent reasons for air ambulance dispatch were trauma, acute coronary syndrome, and strokes. The mean ± SD for HEMS activation time was 9.14 ± 3.63 min, significantly exceeding the national benchmark of three minutes. HEMS prehospital time was 49.73 ± 9.67 min. The comparison of prehospital time intervals indicated that air emergency services are more time-efficient than ground ambulances.
conclusionThis study found that the mean activation time of air ambulances exceeded the national benchmark of three minutes. When comparing prehospital times for air ambulance and ground ambulance services, HEMS was faster than both ground scenarios. The current benchmark for helicopter activation time in Iran may need clarification and revision.
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.