Evaluation of the provision of helicopter emergency medical services in Europe

2018 ◽  
pp. emermed-2018-207553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angharad Jones ◽  
Michael John Donald ◽  
Jan O Jansen

BackgroundHelicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) are a useful means of reducing inequity of access to specialist emergency care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the variations in HEMS provision across Europe, in order to inform the further development of emergency care systems.MethodsThis is a survey of primary HEMS in the 32 countries of the European Economic Area and Switzerland. Information was gathered through internet searches (May to September 2016), and by emailing service providers, requesting verification and completion of data (September 2016 to July 2017). HEMS provision was calculated as helicopters per million population and per 1000 km2 land area, by day and by night, and per US$10 billion of gross domestic product (GDP), for each country.ResultsIn 2016, the smallest and least prosperous countries had no dedicated HEMS provision. Luxembourg had the highest number of helicopters by area and population, day and night. Alpine countries had high daytime HEMS coverage and Scandinavia had good night-time coverage. Most helicopters carried a doctor. Funding of services varied from public to charitable and private. Most services performed both primary (from the scene) and secondary (interfacility) missions.ConclusionsWithin Europe, there is a large variation in the number of helicopters available for emergency care, regardless of whether assessed with reference to population, land area or GDP. Funding of services varied, and did not seem to be clearly related to the availability of HEMS.

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth F. Mock ◽  
Keith D. Wrenn ◽  
Seth W. Wright ◽  
T. Chadwick Eustis ◽  
Corey M. Slovis

AbstractHypothesis:To determine the type and frequency of immediate unsolicited feedback received by emergency medical service (EMS) providers from patients or their family members and emergency department (ED) personnel.Methods:Prospective, observational study of 69 emergency medical services providers in an urban emergency medical service system and 12 metropolitan emergency departments. Feedback was rated by two medical student observers using a prospectively devised original scale.Results:In 295 encounters with patients or family, feedback was rated as follows: 1) none in 224 (76%); 2) positive in 51 (17%); 3) negative in 19 (6%); and 4) mixed in one (<1%). Feedback from 254 encounters with emergency department personnel was rated as: 1) none in 185 (73%); 2) positive in 46 (18%); 3) negative in 21 (8%); and 4) mixed in 2 (1%). Patients who had consumed alcohol were more likely to give negative feedback than were patients who had not consumed alcohol. Feedback from emergency department personnel occurred more often when the emergency medical service provider considered the patient to be critically ill.Conclusion:The two groups provided feedback to emergency medical service providers in approximately one quarter of the calls. When feedback was provided, it was positive more than twice as often as it was negative. Emergency physicians should give regular and constructive feedback to emergency medical services providers more often than currently is the case.


Injury ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. S17
Author(s):  
G.F. Giannakopoulos ◽  
A. Noor ◽  
M.N. Kolodzinskyi ◽  
H.M.T. Christiaans ◽  
C. Boer ◽  
...  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-537
Author(s):  

Emergency care for life-threatening pediatric illness and injury requires specialized resources including equipment, drugs, trained personnel, and facilities. The American Medical Association Commission on Emergency Medical Services has provided guidelines for the categorization of hospital pediatric emergency facilities that have been endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).1 This document was used as the basis for these revised guidelines, which define: 1. The desirable characteristics of a system of Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) that may help achieve a reduction in mortality and morbidity, including long-term disability. 2. The role of health care facilities in identifying and organizing the resources necessary to provide the best possible pediatric emergency care within a region. 3. An integrated system of facilities that provides timely access and appropriate levels of care for all critically ill or injured children. 4. The responsibility of the health cane facility for support of medical control of pre-hospital activities and the pediatric emergency care and education of pre-hospital providers, nurses, and physicians. 5. The role of pediatric centers in providing outreach education and consultation to community facilities. 6. The role of health cane facilities for maintaining communication with the medical home of the patient. Children have their emergency care needs met in a variety of settings, from small community hospitals to large medical centers. Resources available to these health care sites vary, and they may not always have the necessary equipment, supplies, and trained personnel required to meet the special needs of pediatric patients during emergency situations.


2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 348-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabina Fattah ◽  
Anne Siri Johnsen ◽  
Stephen J.M. Sollid ◽  
Torben Wisborg ◽  
Marius Rehn ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document