Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

A Novel Approach for the Administration of Medications and Fluids in Emergency Scenarios and Settings
Published on: November 9, 2016
Interfacility Transport of Emergency Patients by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Versus Ground Emergency
Suha Turkmen1,2, Haris Iftikhar1, Robin Muller3
1Department of Emergency Medicine, Hamad General Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar.
Objectives:
The Interfacility transportation of critically ill patients is a common practice in modern medical care. Transportation of patients may be necessary for clinical or hospital capacity issues. Patient transfers are typically conducted by specialized teams via ground emergency medical services (GEMS) using emergency medical vehicles (i.e., ambulances) or helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) using rotary-wing air ambulances. The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of HEMS and GEMS in terms of the duration of time-critical interfacility transfers.
Methods:
This is a retrospective observational study of emergency interfacility transfer of critically ill adult patients in Qatar between 2018 and 2022. Data on patient demographics, facilities' locations, and multiple mission-related time parameters were collected from the Ambulance Service database and the hospitals' centralized electronic medical records and analyzed. Patients with non-emergency conditions, incomplete transfer data, or HEMS activation delays exceeding 30 min were excluded.
Results:
Data of 518 emergency interfacility transfers (355 GEMS and 163 HEMS) was collected and analyzed. Patients' median age was 45 years old. For transfers shorter than 50 km, HEMS was used in 50.2% (109/217) of cases, while for transfers over 50 km, GEMS was used in 82.1% (247/301) of cases (p < 0.001). The GEMS transfers had a significantly shorter call-to-departure time by 21.9 min, whereas HEMS had a significantly shorter departure-to-arrival time by 23.6 min. However, the difference in total mission time was not significant (p > 0.05). In transfers less than 50 kilometers, HEMS had a longer call-to-departure time by 18.4 min and a shorter departure-to-arrival time by 12.3 min (both p < 0.001). Similar trends were observed in both short (<50 km) and long (>50 km) transfers.
Conclusions:
Ground ambulance may offer a comparably as efficient option for emergency patient transfers over short and medium distances, as no significant difference was found in the total transfer times and clinical patient outcomes were not assessed. The results obtained in Qatar's context may not be universally generalizable. Helicopter ambulance may be advantageous when the patient needs to be transferred very quickly over a longer distance.
More Related Videos
04:05Author Spotlight: Unveiling Prognostic Indicators in Heart Failure - The Role of Phase Angle and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis
Published on: June 30, 2023
07:52Expired CO2 Measurement in Intubated or Spontaneously Breathing Patients from the Emergency Department
Published on: January 29, 2011
Related Concept Videos
Emerging Adulthood
Introduction Cardiac Emergencies
Applications of GIS: Disaster Management and Emergency Response
Primary Healthcare Services
In 1978, international leaders convened in Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan, for what would be a pivotal event in global health. The Alma-Ata Declaration was the first to call...
Preventive Healthcare Services
Inhaled Medications