Intubation during a medevac flight: safety and effect on total prehospital time in the helicopter emergency medical service system

• Published in: Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine Vol. 28; no. 1; p. 89
• Main Authors: Maeyama, Hiroki, Naito, Hiromichi, Guyette, Francis X, Yorifuji, Takashi, Banshotani, Yuki, Matsui, Daisaku, Yumoto, Tetsuya, Nakao, Atsunori, Kobayashi, Makoto
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 07.09.2020; Springer Nature B.V; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Age; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Air ambulance; Air Ambulances; Aircraft; Aircraft safety; Airway management; Analysis; Blood pressure; Cardiovascular disease; Cohort Studies; Emergency medical care; Emergency medical services; Emergency services; Female; Glasgow Coma Scale; Humans; Hypotension; Hypoxia; Intubation; Intubation, Intratracheal - adverse effects; Japan; Male; Medical research; Middle Aged; Original Research; Patients; Physicians; Respiratory diseases; Retrospective Studies; Safety and security measures; Sepsis; Stroke; Success; Time Factors; Time-to-treatment; Transportation; Trauma; Japan; Air ambulance; Airway management; Time-to-treatment; Transportation
• ISSN: 1757-7241; 1757-7241
• DOI: 10.1186/s13049-020-00784-z

The Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) commonly intubates patients who require advanced airway support prior to takeoff. In-flight intubation (IFI) is avoided because it is considered difficult due to limited space, difficulty communicating, and vibration in flight. However, IFI may shorten the total prehospital time. We tested whether IFI can be performed safely by the HEMS. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in adult patients transported from 2010 to 2017 who received prehospital, non-emergent intubation from a single HEMS. We divided the cohort in two groups, patients intubated during flight (flight group, FG) and patients intubated before takeoff (ground group, GG). The primary outcome was the proportion of successful intubations. Secondary outcomes included total prehospital time and the incidence of complications. We analyzed 376 patients transported during the study period, 192 patients in the FG and 184 patients in the GG. The intubation success rate did not differ between the two groups (FG 189/192 [98.4%] vs. GG 179/184 [97.3%], p = 0.50). There were also no differences in hypoxia (FG 4/117 [3.4%] vs. GG 4/95 [4.2%], p = 1.00) or hypotension (FG 6/117 [5.1%] vs. GG 5/95 [5.3%], p = 1.00) between the two groups. Scene time and total prehospital time were shorter in the FG (scene time 7 min vs. 14 min, p <  0.001; total prehospital time 33.5 min vs. 40.0 min, p <  0.001). IFI was safely performed with high success rates, similar to intubation on the ground, without increasing the risk of hypoxia or hypotension. IFI by experienced providers shortened transportation time, which may improve patient outcomes.