SynthesisBMC emergency medicine2025
Helicopter EMS for scene response to head-injured patients: systematic review & meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHelicopter EMS (HEMS) is an important component of prehospital trauma scene response care worldwide, including for traumatic brain injury (TBI), a major cause of mortality in injured patients. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis (MA) of trauma HEMS scene responses to patients with severe head injury to determine whether air medical response is associated with improved survival.
methodsA broad and systematic search of the literature was conducted from the years 1970–2024. We included studies with the outcome of mortality in HEMS vs. the control of ground EMS (GEMS) in trauma scene transports (adult or pediatric) with severe TBI as defined by Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) < 9 or Head Abbreviated Injury Score (AISHead) ≥ 3. A random effects restricted maximum likelihood MA was conducted, with post-analysis evaluation for bias.
resultsOf 21 HEMS outcomes studies evaluating TBI, 15 were eligible for MA, and effect estimates were HEMS-favorable in 13 and statistically significant in 9. The null hypothesis of no HEMS association with TBI survival was rejected (p < .01) for both the GCS < 9 and the AISHead3+ groups. Heterogeneity measures supported generation of a pooled effect estimate for the GCS < 9 group: HEMS survival OR 1.37 (95% CI 1.23–1.53, I2 0%) but not for the AISHead3+ group (for which HEMS had statistically significant association with improved survival in six of eight studies, but to different degrees with resulting I2 of 93%). There were no signs of small-study (publication) or other substantial bias, with overall evaluation of moderate to low risk of bias.
conclusionsThe available evidence suggests a survival benefit associated with HEMS scene response for patients with severe head injuries as defined by GCS < 9. For this group, at the median mortality from all studies (24%), HEMS scene response to TBI saves one life for every 19 transports (95% CI for number needed to treat, 15–28).
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.