Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2025

Standardized Model of Ventricular Fibrillation and Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Swine
Published on: January 30, 2020
Outcomes of basic versus advanced prehospital life support in severe pediatric trauma
Danny Epstein1, Sharon Goldman2, Irina Radomislensky2
1Critical Care Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Insights
Advanced life support (ALS) transport did not improve survival for severely injured children compared to basic life support (BLS). This study found higher in-hospital mortality for children receiving ALS, suggesting BLS may be as effective for pediatric trauma patients.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Trauma Care
- Emergency Medical Services
- Clinical Outcomes Research
Background:
- The optimal prehospital care strategy for pediatric trauma remains debated.
- Advanced life support (ALS) is often considered the standard, but evidence in pediatric trauma is limited.
- Previous studies in adult trauma have shown no survival advantage for ALS over basic life support (BLS).
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine if ALS transport improves survival rates in severely injured children compared to BLS.
- To evaluate the association between mode of prehospital transport and mortality in pediatric trauma patients.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study using the Israeli National Trauma Registry (2011-2020).
- Inclusion criteria: severely injured children (age < 18, Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥16).
- Analysis of patient survival by transport mode (ALS vs. BLS) using logistic regression.
Main Results:
- 65.1% of 3167 severely injured children received ALS transport.
- Children transported by ALS had higher in-hospital mortality (9.2% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001).
- Risk-adjusted analysis showed ALS transport was associated with increased mortality (adjusted OR 2.27, p = 0.04).
Conclusions:
- Prehospital ALS care was not associated with reduced mortality in severely injured children compared to BLS.
- Potential confounding by severity necessitates further research to validate findings.
- The study highlights the need for re-evaluation of ALS as the default for pediatric trauma patients.
Objective:
The role of basic life support (BLS) vs. advanced life support (ALS) in pediatric trauma is controversial. Although ALS is widely accepted as the gold standard, previous studies have found no advantage of ALS over BLS care in adult trauma. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether ALS transport confers a survival advantage over BLS among severely injured children.
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study of data included in the Israeli National Trauma Registry from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2020 was conducted. All the severely injured children (age < 18 years and injury severity score [ISS] ≥16) were included. Patient survival by mode of transport was analyzed using logistic regression.
Results:
Of 3167 patients included in the study, 65.1% were transported by ALS and 34.9% by BLS. Significantly more patients transported by ALS had ISS ≥25 as well as abnormal vital signs at admission. The ALS and BLS cohorts were comparable in age, gender, mechanism of injury, and prehospital time. Children transported by ALS had higher in-hospital mortality (9.2% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001). Following risk adjustment, patients transported by ALS teams were significantly more likely to die than patients transported by BLS (adjusted OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.05-5.41, p = 0.04). Patients with ISS ≥50 had comparable mortality rates in both groups (45.9% vs. 55.6%, p = 0.837) while patients with GCS <9 transported by ALS had higher mortality (25.9% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.019). Admission to a level II trauma center vs. a level I hospital was also associated with increased mortality (adjusted OR 2.78 (95% CI 1.75-4.55, p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
Among severely injured children, prehospital ALS care was not associated with lower mortality rates relative to BLS care. Because of potential confounding by severity in this retrospective analysis, further studies are warranted to validate these results.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation I: Adult
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Flail Chest-II
Assessment:
1. Clinical Evaluation:
History:
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation V: Advanced Airway Management Techniques
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use

