ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025
Respiratory support during neonatal and infant aeromedical interfacility transfers in the Western Cape, South Africa: a retrospective review.
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 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.
- Contemporary Evidence on Interhospital Neonatal Transport as a Potentially Sepsis-Relevant Care Interval: A Scoping Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterfacility transfer (IFT) of neonates and infants is common in South Africa, with many needing respiratory support. Recently, interest in non-invasive ventilation, particularly nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP), during IFTs has increased; however, local evidence is limited. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of neonates and infants requiring respiratory support and to evaluate the introduction of nCPAP during IFTs by the South African Red Cross Air Mercy Service (AMS) in the Western Cape between 2017 and 2019.
methodsA retrospective descriptive review of all neonates (≤ 28 days) and infants ( > 28 days to ≤ 1 year) requiring respiratory support during AMS IFTs was conducted between 2017 and 2019.
resultsRespiratory support was required for 70.4% (435/618) of all neonates and infants transported during the study period. Of the 435 IFTs, 61.4% (n = 267) were neonates and 51.9% (n = 224) males. Approximately two-thirds (n = 296, 68.0%) were transported by rotor-wing (RW) aircraft, and Emergency Care Practitioners (n = 344, 79.1%) were the most common primary crew member. The median stabilisation time for RW and fixed-wing (FW) aircraft IFTs was > 60 mins, with median RW mission times approximately 3 hrs and > 5.5 hrs for FW. Common diagnoses included respiratory distress syndrome in neonates and pneumonia in infants. During IFTs, 174 (40.0%) patients received oxygen (O
conclusionThis study highlights the frequency of neonatal and infant aeromedical IFTs requiring respiratory support and the increasing adoption of nCPAP during aeromedical IFTs in one South African province. The findings suggest that nCPAP is a feasible respiratory support modality in the aeromedical IFT context; however, the safe and effective implementation relies on careful patient selection, adequately trained personnel, and appropriate equipment. Further research is warranted to evaluate the overall safety and clinical outcomes of nCPAP during IFTs and develop robust protocols and guidelines tailored to the South African context.
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.