Observational studyEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Performance characteristics and complications of an Inter-Changeable Operator Model for intubation in an Australian helicopter emergency medical service.
Observational study in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 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.
- The impact of airway assistants on prehospital endotracheal intubations - a subgroup analysis of data from anaesthesiologist-staffed helicopter critical care teams.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Inter-Changeable Operator Model (ICOM) enables paramedics and flight nurses to perform intubations interchangeably with team physicians in prehospital critical care. However, literature on ICOM characteristics and performance is limited.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, observational study of an ICOM operating within an Australian Helicopter Emergency Medical Service over a nine-year period. First pass success, major complication rates and clinically important time intervals were compared between first intubator groups.
resultsA total of 413 patients met the inclusion criteria, with paramedics performing the majority of first intubation attempts (379/413, 91.8%). Physicians primarily conducted second intubation attempts and managed high-risk patients. In unadjusted analysis, the risk of major complication in the paramedic/supervised registrar group was not lower than the most senior physician intubator group (relative risk [RR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-1.32; P = 0.198) and after adjustment the risk was also not lower (RR 0.60, 95% CI: 0.24-1.54; P = 0.289). First pass failure occurred in 12 (3.1%) and 1 (4.8%) patients intubated by paramedic/supervised registrar and most senior physician groups, respectively (P = 0.498). The median (95% CI) adjusted difference in contact to intubation time between paramedic/supervised registrar first intubator and most senior physician groups was -2 min (-7 to 3; P = 0.392). Total adjusted scene time was also not significantly different between groups (median difference 2 min, 95% CI: -3 to 7; P = 0.500).
conclusionsParamedics conducting most intubations within an ICOM are both safe and efficient. Larger studies are required to examine differences between physician subgroups.
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.