In the history of aviation there has never been a period when so much effort has been demonstrated to improve the safety standards of international and national airports. This has come about through the knowledge that aircraft crashes in recent years at some airports have been mismanaged because of bad or non-existent planning for such a disaster, and by poor emergency medical response.We share today a faith in the safety of the aircraft. We share, too, the awareness that more people have survived aircraft crashes than have perished, and that if there are survivors on board, in most cases there will be more survivors than dead (1).The encouragement to improve airport safety and crash management has come largely from the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO); from the Club of Mainz Association, who in 1979 set up a consultant committee to investigate and improve international airports; from the Flight Safety Foundation and from the US Airline Pilots Association. All these organizations have rightly questioned the quality of existing emergency medical response to an aircraft crash, and have offered expert advice to improve disaster preparedness and management. This article will report our response to this challenge, particularly in New Zealand, but will also concern our neighboring continent of Australia.New Zealand, set in the Pacific Ocean with its two long islands, has international flight contacts through its three major airports with North America, South East Asia, Japan and the South West Pacific. It has its own national aviation hazards of mountain chains, difficult landing approaches from the sea, made more hazardous with strong winds which are a feature of our capital city airport. Despite this, the safety record of New Zealand airports is extremely high.
Emergency Medical Response in Mass Casualty Tunnel Incidents—with Emphasis on Prehospital Care
