ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2026
Helicopter versus GROUND emergency medical services in mountainous trauma care: a comparative cohort study on time efficiency, golden hour achievement, and clinical outcomes in the Qinba region.
Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the time efficiency and clinical outcomes of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) versus ground emergency medical services (GROUND) for severe trauma in the mountainous Qinba region, with a focus on achieving the "golden hour" and its impact on patient prognosis.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included severe trauma patients (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥ 16) transported by HEMS or GROUND between January 2018 and September 2025. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed using age, sex, APACHE II, and ISS scores to control for confounding. The primary outcome was a composite of major in-hospital complications. "Golden hour" compliance was defined as completion of critical imaging (FAST/CT) and admission to the operating room or intensive care unit within 60 min of the emergency call. Time metrics, mortality, organ dysfunction (SOFA), length of stay, and discharge neurological status (GOS) were compared.
resultsAfter matching, 77 well-balanced pairs were formed. HEMS achieved a significantly higher golden hour compliance rate than GROUND (71.43% vs. 2.60%, p < 0.001). HEMS significantly reduced transport time (median 15 vs. 105 min, p < 0.001) and total call-to-hospital arrival time (46 vs. 158 min, p < 0.001). Clinically, HEMS was associated with lower 24-h mortality (1.30% vs. 10.39%, p = 0.039), lower composite major complication rate (7.88% vs. 26.33%, p = 0.026), lower SOFA scores (median 12 vs. 20, p < 0.001), shorter ICU (5.62 vs. 9.78 days, p < 0.001) and hospital stays (13.44 vs. 21.34 days, p < 0.001), and higher GOS scores at discharge (4.0 vs. 2.64, p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression identified HEMS as an independent protective factor for better outcomes. ROC analysis showed perfect discrimination of HEMS vs. GROUND by transport time and total arrival time (AUC = 1.000).
conclusionIn mountainous regions, HEMS markedly improves golden hour attainment, translating into reduced early mortality, fewer complications, milder organ dysfunction, shorter hospitalizations, and better neurological recovery. These findings support the integration of HEMS into trauma systems in geographically challenging areas.
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.