ArticleJournal of rural medicine : JRM2025
Intentional transit practice through a nearby hospital for remote area emergencies provides earlier primary care than helicopter emergency medical services alone in rural emergencies: a single-center, observational study.
Article in Journal of rural medicine : JRM, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Providing emergency care to serious patients in rural areas remains challenging. Intentional transit practice involves transporting a serious patient to a nearby hospital while requesting the Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS). This study aims to evaluate its effectiveness on earlier primary medical interventions and the decision of the destination hospital. Patient and Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational study at a HEMS base hospital in a rural area of Japan. The study participants included patients who underwent the intentional transit practice between April 2012 and March 2019. We compared actual times to estimated times for each case treated with the HEMS alone (HEMS-alone model). Outcomes were the time from ambulance call to reaching the physician (physician reaching time), arrival at the final destination facility (destination hospital arrival time), and helicopter waiting time at the landing zone (helicopter waiting time). Subgroup analyses by region and an analysis of the relationship between diagnostic tests performed at the transit hospital and the type of destination facility were performed. Results: Eighty-seven patients were eligible for analysis. Compared to the HEMS-alone model, the intentional transit practice reduced the physician reaching time (median [interquartile] min) (26 [21-32] vs. 37 [29-47], Conclusion: The intentional transit practice is beneficial for providing primary care earlier than the HEMS alone and for transport to more specific facilities. However, it delays arrival at the destination facility and increases helicopter waiting time.
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.