Is It Safe to Fly Patients with Penetrating Trauma in a Rural State?

BACKGROUND: There is limited data pertaining to the triage and transportation of patients with penetrating trauma in rural states. Large urban trauma centers have found rapid transport to be beneficial even when done by nonemergency medical staff. However, there is limited application to a rural state with only a single level 1 trauma center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This a retrospective observational study of 854 trauma patients transported by helicopter emergency services between 2009 and 2015 to the state's only level 1 trauma center.

RESULTS: After excluding patients with other injuries or lack of data, 854 patients underwent final analysis. Compared with penetrating trauma, blunt trauma had a significantly different chance of survival (92.0% versus 81.2%, P = 0.002) and a significantly different injury severity score (17 ± 12 versus 12 ± 9, P = 0.002). After controlling for blunt injuries, age, gender, injury severity score, tachycardia, tachypnea, hypotension, glasgow coma scale, and dispatch to hospital arrival time in multivariate analysis, blunt trauma had higher odds of survival than penetrating trauma (OR, 5.97; 95% CI, 2.52-14.12; P = <0.001 = 1). Gender, tachycardia, tachypnea, and dispatch to arrival time did not impact a patient's likelihood of survival.

CONCLUSIONS: Penetrating trauma has a higher mortality when compared with blunt trauma in Helicopter Emergency Services transported patients in a rural state. Perhaps a new algorithm in the management of penetrating trauma would include hemorrhage control at a locoregional hospital before definitive care. Further study is required to understand the exact variables that lead to a higher mortality in penetrating trauma in a rural state.