IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0335665.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Association of ambulance and helicopter response times with patient survival: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Martin Hansen
  • Martine Siw Nielsen
  • Marius Rehn
  • Annmarie Lassen
  • Anders Perner
  • Søren Mikkelsen
  • Anne Craveiro Brøchner

Abstract

Background: Only sparse scientific evidence supports the notion that the shortest possible response time relates to improved patient outcomes in acute conditions, other than out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and trauma. Confounders such as bidirectional causality and confounding by indication may influence patient-centered outcomes, which may prevent actionable conclusions from literature reviews. The purpose of the systematic literature review was to assess current evidence on association, if any, between ambulance and helicopter response times and survival in all patient categories treated by ambulance or helicopter services. Methods: The systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Clinical Trial Registries. All study designs and settings identified as relevant to the topic were eligible. The investigators retrieved data from a predefined template and extracted data from a predefined template. Two reviewers worked independently, and conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer. The researchers used PRISMA guidelines for abstracting data and GRADE methodology for assessing data quality and validity. As per study protocol, the primary study outcome was patient survival, and the main measurement was response time for emergency medical services vehicles. Results: The investigators included 115 studies that in total included 691,056 patients, comprising patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, trauma, drownings, and including both adults and children in various settings. The overall median survival rate was 11.5% (IQR 5.2; 25.8). Response time varied between 1.10 and 48.62 minutes. The predefined domains and items of interest were accounted for in 46.7% of the included literature. In a meta-analysis of sub-groups, there was a positive correlation in selected populations. Certainty of evidence was very low as per GRADE methodology. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis found lack of evidence to infer an association between the EMS response time and patient survival, with very low certainty of evidence. The investigators found substantive research and knowledge gaps. Therefore, no actionable conclusions can be made from this systematic review.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Martin Hansen & Martine Siw Nielsen & Marius Rehn & Annmarie Lassen & Anders Perner & Søren Mikkelsen & Anne Craveiro Brøchner, 2025. "Association of ambulance and helicopter response times with patient survival: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(11), pages 1-15, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335665
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0335665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335665
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335665&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0335665?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335665. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.