Currently Empty: € 0,00
Back to: 1.1 History
0
History
During World War I, the significance of air transport in medical evacuation emerged, facilitating the swift and efficient movement of injured individuals from frontline areas and battlefields. The recognition of its potential led to notable developments in the post-war era.
In 1928, John Flynn established the Flying Doctor Service in Australia, later known as the Royal Flying Doctor Service. This groundbreaking initiative aimed to deliver a comprehensive range of medical services to civilians residing in remote regions. Services encompassed routine consultations with traveling general practitioners, air ambulance evacuations, and various emergency medical interventions.
The utilization of fixed-wing military air ambulances became commonplace during World War II, marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of aeromedical transport. The subsequent Korean and Vietnam wars witnessed the increased adoption of helicopters for medical evacuation purposes, showcasing their effectiveness in challenging terrains.
Transitioning into civilian healthcare, helicopters found a crucial role in urban settings, particularly for shorter distances. They became instrumental in transporting paramedics or specialized doctors swiftly to locations requiring urgent medical attention. Simultaneously, helicopters played a pivotal role in transporting patients, especially in cases of major trauma, to hospitals. Meanwhile, fixed-wing aircraft continued to serve in long-distance medical transport, emphasizing their role in covering vast geographical areas.
This evolution in medical transport has significantly contributed to improving healthcare accessibility, particularly in remote and challenging environments, demonstrating the ongoing synergy between aviation and healthcare services.
Air medical services offer distinct advantages over land ambulances, as they can travel at higher speeds and cover a broader geographic area. This capability proves especially beneficial in sparsely-populated rural regions where rapid access to medical care may be challenging.
One of the notable strengths of air medical services lies in their ability to address major trauma injuries efficiently. Advocates of the controversial “golden hour” theory posit that transporting major trauma patients swiftly to specialized trauma centers enhances their chances of positive outcomes. In this context, medical responders aboard helicopters can deliver a heightened level of care directly at the trauma scene and expedite transportation to designated trauma centers. This dual capability significantly contributes to the critical early stages of trauma care.
Moreover, air medical services play a crucial role in providing advanced critical care during patient transfers from community hospitals to trauma centers. This ensures that patients receive continuous, high-level medical attention throughout the transport process, optimizing their chances of recovery.
In essence, the swift mobility and expansive coverage of air medical services not only address the unique challenges of rural areas but also prove instrumental in delivering timely and specialized care to individuals facing major trauma injuries. This integrated approach to pre-hospital and inter-hospital care enhances overall emergency medical services, particularly in situations where time is of the essence.
The utilization of air ambulance transport comes with a significant financial burden, as indicated by various sources. If not employed judiciously, its high cost may result in inefficiency and undermine its overall cost-effectiveness. In instances where an air ambulance is dispatched to attend to a patient in close proximity to a hospital, there is a risk of introducing unnecessary delays in reaching the medical facility.
Research conducted in 1996 in England and Wales raised questions about the efficacy of air ambulance services. Specifically, the study found no conclusive evidence supporting improvements in vehicle response times for patients attended to by air ambulances compared to those attended by land ambulances. Moreover, the same review revealed that patients did not reach the hospital any faster when attended by air ambulances.
Further investigation by the same authors into health outcomes in Cornwall and London failed to demonstrate any tangible evidence that the presence of air ambulance (HEMS) services contributed to enhanced survival rates among trauma patients. These findings underscore the need for a critical evaluation of the deployment of air ambulance services to ensure optimal resource utilization and improved patient outcomes.
As the discussion on the effectiveness of air ambulance services continues, it becomes imperative to weigh the costs against the benefits, emphasizing the importance of strategic deployment and considering alternative means of transportation for cases where air transport may not provide a substantial advantage. This scrutiny aims to enhance the overall efficiency and cost-effectiveness of emergency medical services while maintaining a commitment to delivering timely and effective care to those in need.
The effective utilization of helicopter services for trauma response hinges on the ground responder’s ability to accurately assess whether air medical transport is warranted. Establishing comprehensive protocols and providing training is essential to ensure that appropriate triage criteria are consistently applied. Striking the right balance in these criteria is crucial – overly stringent criteria may hinder the swift care and transport of trauma victims, while overly relaxed criteria could expose patients to potential dangers, including adverse weather conditions and other aviation-related risks.
The paramount consideration in deciding whether to transport a patient by helicopter is crew and patient safety. Various factors, such as weather conditions, air traffic patterns, and distances, including the journey from the trauma scene to the closest level 1 trauma center, must be carefully evaluated. Additionally, the comfort and confidence of the flight crew play a pivotal role in decision-making. A widely accepted safety guideline in situations where there is one pilot and two medical crew members is encapsulated in the phrase “3 to go, 1 to say ‘NO’.” This emphasizes that if any one crew member is uncomfortable with the flight for any reason, the flight is cancelled.
Despite the increased number of air medical service programs and usage, concerns have been raised about the safety of these services. While the number of crashes may be on the rise, it is crucial to consider the concurrent increase in the number of programs and service utilization. Factors associated with fatal crashes of medical transport helicopters include night flying, adverse weather conditions, and post-crash fires. This underscores the ongoing need for rigorous safety protocols, training, and continuous evaluation to mitigate risks and ensure the safe and effective delivery of air medical services.
An air ambulance is a specialized aircraft, either a helicopter or fixed-wing plane, equipped to transport individuals in medical emergencies or over distances and terrains impractical for conventional ground ambulances. Fixed-wing aircraft are commonly employed for long-distance patient transfers and repatriation from foreign countries, collectively known as aeromedical operations. In certain scenarios, these aircraft may also be utilized in search and rescue missions for missing or wanted individuals.
Similar to ground ambulances, air ambulances are equipped with essential medical tools necessary for monitoring and treating injured or ill patients. Standard equipment includes medications, ventilators, ECGs and monitoring units, CPR equipment, and stretchers. A medically staffed and equipped air ambulance provides comprehensive medical care during flight, while a non-medically equipped and staffed aircraft simply transports patients without in-flight care. Military organizations and NATO distinguish between the two, referring to the former as medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) and the latter as casualty evacuation (CASEVAC).
In recognition of the critical nature of air ambulance operations, Air Traffic Control (ATC) provides special treatment, akin to ground ambulances using lights and sirens, but only when actively transporting a patient. During such operations, air ambulance aircraft adopt the call sign MEDEVAC (formerly LIFEGUARD) and receive priority handling both in the air and on the ground, ensuring swift and efficient transportation of patients in critical conditions. This prioritization underscores the importance of seamless coordination and support for air ambulance services during life-saving missions.
The concept of treating patients in flight, a cornerstone of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) innovations, has roots in military practices. The notion of using aircraft as ambulances traces back to the early days of powered flight, with experimentation in air evacuation taking place during the First World War.
The first recorded British ambulance flight occurred in 1917 during the Ottoman Empire, where a wounded soldier in the Camel Corps was flown to a hospital in a de Havilland DH9 within 45 minutes. The same journey by land would have taken an estimated 3 days. In the 1920s, both official and unofficial air ambulance services emerged worldwide, although early aircraft limitations garnered mixed reviews.
Despite the challenges, France and the United Kingdom organized air ambulance services during the African and Middle Eastern Colonial Wars of the 1920s. For instance, during the suppression of the “Mad Mullah” in Somaliland in 1920, the British used an Airco DH.9A as an air ambulance. It carried a single stretcher behind the pilot under a fairing. The French evacuated over 7,000 casualties during this period. The concept continued to evolve, and an organized military air ambulance service transported wounded from the Spanish Civil War for treatment in Nazi Germany by 1936, a service that persisted through the Second World War.
The use of helicopters for medevac purposes saw its inception during World War II, with the evacuation of British combat casualties in Burma using a US Army Sikorsky R-4. Dedicated helicopter use by U.S. forces occurred in the Korean War, where they not only removed casualties from the battlefield but also transported critical patients to hospital ships after initial emergency treatment in field hospitals. This marked the beginning of the military’s extensive use of helicopters for casualty evacuation.
As aircraft capabilities advanced, so did the knowledge and expertise in the use of air ambulances. In Vietnam by 1969, specially trained medical corpsmen and helicopter air ambulances demonstrated better rates of survival for servicemen wounded in battle compared to motorists injured on California freeways. This milestone inspired the first experiments with civilian paramedics worldwide. More recently, during the Iraq War, UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters were utilized for air ambulance services, catering to both military personnel and civilians.
The application of military aircraft as battlefield ambulances continues to evolve globally, with a growing emphasis on fixed-wing aircraft for long-distance travel, including the repatriation of the wounded. Presently, a NATO working group is exploring the use of unpiloted aerial vehicles (UAVs) for casualty evacuation, showcasing ongoing advancements in the intersection of aviation and emergency medical services.
The inception of civilian air ambulances was likely incidental, emerging from the unique needs of remote and inaccessible regions, especially in northern Canada, Australia, and Scandinavian countries. In these areas, where settlements were cut off from road access for extended periods, if not year-round, the reliance on small aircraft and “bush” pilots became essential for transporting supplies, mail, and medical professionals. These bush pilots likely conducted the initial civilian air ambulance trips on an ad hoc basis, driven by the evident necessity for such services.
The early 1920s saw Sweden establishing a standing air ambulance system, followed by Siam (Thailand). In 1928, the first formal, full-time air ambulance service was founded in the Australian outback, evolving into the renowned Royal Flying Doctor Service, which remains operational today. Marie Marvingt established Africa’s first civil air ambulance service in Morocco in 1934, while the Highlands and Islands Medical Service introduced air ambulance services in 1936 to cater to remote areas of Highland Scotland.
While air ambulances quickly proved their worth in remote locations, their integration into developed areas progressed more gradually. After World War II, the Saskatchewan government in Canada established the first civilian air ambulance in North America, considering the vast distances and remote communities within the province. The Saskatchewan Air Ambulance service continues to operate to this day. In the U.S., J. Walter Schaefer founded the first air ambulance service in Los Angeles in 1947 as part of Schaefer Ambulance Service, becoming the first FAA-certified air ambulance service in the country.
During these early stages, paramedicine had not yet been established, and unless accompanied by a physician or nurse, air ambulances primarily focused on medical transportation. Much of the early use of aircraft as ambulances, particularly helicopters, involved the improvised use of military aircraft, a practice that gradually became more organized and persists globally today.
In the United States, approximately half a million air ambulance transports occur annually. Two significant research programs in the late 1960s, Project CARESOM in Mississippi and the Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic (MAST) system in San Antonio, assessed the impact of medical helicopters on mortality and morbidity in civilian settings. These programs, initially experimental, successfully highlighted the need for air medical services. Following their establishment, the challenge shifted towards operating these services cost-effectively. Many civilian governments began utilizing existing aircraft for other purposes to provide efficient air support to the evolving Emergency Medical Services. This adaptive approach has contributed to the widespread and critical role of air ambulances in modern healthcare systems.
Following the proven success of the concept, dedicated civilian air ambulance services began to emerge, marking a significant advancement in aeromedical care. On November 1, 1970, Christoph 1, the first permanent civil air ambulance helicopter, commenced operations at the Hospital of Harlaching in Munich, Germany. Christoph 1’s success prompted rapid expansion across Germany, with subsequent helicopters like Christoph 10 (1975), Christoph 20 (1981), and Christoph 51 (1989) entering service. As of 2007, around 80 helicopters named after Saint Christopher, such as Christoph Europa 5 and Christoph Brandenburg, serve various regions, including Denmark.
Austria adopted the German system in 1983 with Christophorus 1 entering service in Innsbruck. In 1975, Hans Burghart, one of the pioneers of civilian air rescue in Germany, presented the concept of “Rescue Helicopters in Primary and Secondary Missions” at an academic conference in the United States, impacting aviation training at Fort Rucker, Alabama.
The first civilian, hospital-based medical helicopter program in the United States commenced operations in 1972 with Flight For Life Colorado, featuring a single Alouette III helicopter based in Denver. In Ontario, Canada, the air ambulance program began in 1977, emphasizing a paramedic-based system of care, with physicians or nurses being relatively uncommon. Today, this system operates through a private contractor (ORNGE), with 33 aircraft stationed at 26 bases across the province, performing both interfacility transfers and on-scene responses.
Civilian air ambulance services have become commonplace globally, providing crucial support for ground-based EMS systems. In SFR Yugoslavia, the first air ambulance appeared in the 1980s, with much of the fleet repurposed from military service in response to increased car accidents on highways.
Air ambulance services worldwide vary in organization and funding models. Differentiation can be made based on military or civilian models, government-funded or fee-for-service operations, those donated by businesses, or those funded by public donations. The distinction between dedicated aircraft and those with multiple purposes and roles is also notable. Aircraft types, including rotary-wing, fixed-wing, or very large aircraft, contribute to the diversity of air ambulance services. Private aircraft charter companies often provide non-emergency air ambulance services on a fee-for-service basis in almost all jurisdictions. The evolution of these services highlights the critical role air ambulances play in providing emergency medical care and transportation.
Governments often play a significant role in providing air ambulance services, either directly or through contracted commercial service providers, such as aircraft charter companies. These services may focus on critical care patient transport, supporting ground-based EMS on scenes, or a combination of these roles. Governments typically establish guidelines to control operating costs and may specify operating procedures to limit potential liability. However, the day-to-day operations are usually managed by local experts, including physicians and aviation executives. Examples of this operating model include Ontario’s ORNGE program and the Polish Lotnicze Pogotowie Ratunkowe (LPR), which is a national system covering the entire country and funded by the government but operated independently.
In some regions, the air ambulance service is managed by a hospital or medical center, such as MetroHealth Medical Center in North East Ohio, which owns Metro Life Flight to transport patients to its level I trauma and burn unit. In the United Kingdom, the Scottish Ambulance Service operates helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft around the clock.
In cases where the presence of dedicated air ambulances is not practical due to cost considerations, aircraft may be operated by another government or quasi-government agency and made available to EMS for air ambulance service when needed. For example, in southern New South Wales, Australia, the helicopter responding as an air ambulance is operated by the local hydroelectric utility, with paramedics provided by the New South Wales Ambulance Service. In some instances, local EMS provides the flight paramedic to the aircraft operator as needed.
There are also cases where the air ambulance is run as a dual concern with another governmental body. For instance, the Wiltshire Air Ambulance in the UK was run as a joint Ambulance Service and police unit until 2014.
In other scenarios, paramedics may staff the aircraft full-time but have a dual function. In the Maryland State Police, for example, the flight paramedic is a serving State Trooper whose primary role is to act as the Observer Officer on a police helicopter when not responding to medical emergencies.
While many local jurisdictions do not charge for air ambulance services, the cost of providing such services is substantial. Therefore, many organizations, including government-run operations, may charge for their services. Fee-for-service operators, such as aircraft charter companies, hospitals, and private-for-profit EMS systems, are generally responsible for their own organization and may need to meet government licensing requirements. Rega in Switzerland is an example of a fee-for-service air ambulance provider. In the European Union, most air ambulance services operate on a fee-for-service basis, except for systems that rely on private subscription models. Overall, there is often a mix of operation types in different jurisdictions.
In certain instances, local businesses or multinational companies may choose to fund local air ambulance services as a gesture of goodwill or for public relations purposes. Examples of this philanthropic support are common in the European Union. For instance, in London, the Virgin Corporation previously donated to the Helicopter Emergency Medical Service. Similarly, in Germany and the Netherlands, a significant number of ‘Christoph’ air ambulance operations are funded by ADAC, Germany’s largest automobile club, and DRF Luftrettung. In Australia and New Zealand, many air ambulance helicopter operations receive sponsorship from the Westpac Bank.
In these cases, the operational details of the air ambulance service may vary, but the arrangement is the result of a carefully negotiated agreement involving the government, EMS, hospitals, and the sponsoring entity. While sponsors typically receive advertising exposure in exchange for their funding, they generally take a ‘hands-off’ approach to daily operations. Instead, they rely on subject matter specialists, allowing the medical and aviation professionals to manage the service effectively. This model enables businesses to contribute to community well-being while aligning their brand with a critical and life-saving service.
Air ambulance services can be funded through voluntary charitable fundraising, rather than relying solely on government funding, or they may receive limited government subsidies to supplement local donations. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom, employ a mix of such systems. In Scotland, the parliament directly funds the air ambulance service through the Scottish Ambulance Service. In England and Wales, however, the service is funded on a charitable basis through various local charities covering each region.
The ‘Association of Air Ambulance (AAA)’ in the UK has played a significant role in creating a political climate that recognizes the substantial contribution charities make to trauma care. The AAA has published guidance and frameworks, such as the “Framework for a High Performing Air Ambulance Service,” detailing developments from 2008 to 2013. The organization provides Best Practice Guidance on operational and clinical functions and sets a code of conduct for all full members, including ambulance services and charities.
An example of a not-for-profit hospital-based critical care air ambulance service is Memorial Hermann Life Flight in Houston, Texas, USA. Operating six EC-145 twin-engine helicopters as of 2023, the service relies on community support and fundraising efforts.
Another area of distinction is the operation of large fixed-wing air ambulances, often referred to as “heavy-lift” operations. Historically, such operations were primarily military and designed to support overseas combat operations. Military organizations like the United States Air Force, German Luftwaffe, and British Royal Air Force have capabilities for specialized air ambulance operations. An exception to the military-only rule is the Swedish National Air Medevac (SNAM), owned by the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency, which provides long-distance transport with full medical support using a 737-800 aircraft under contract with Scandinavian Airlines.
In recent years, the demand for quick patient transport to facilities offering higher levels of care or repatriation has led to exceptions to the military-only rule. Air medical companies now use both large and small fixed-wing aircraft configured to provide advanced levels of care, especially for individuals covered by their health insurance, affiliated travel insurance, or protection plans. This reflects the evolving landscape of air ambulance services to meet diverse needs and scenarios.
Recommended References
- McGinnis, K. K., Judge, T., Nemitz, B., O’connor, R., Bass, R., Bishop, B., … & Cone, D. (2007). Air medical services: future development as an integrated component of the emergency medical services (EMS) system: a guidance document by the Air Medical Task Force of the National Association of State EMS Officials, National Association of EMS Physicians, Association of Air Medical Services. Prehospital Emergency Care, 11(4), 353-368.
- Bell, R. C. (2009). The ambulance: a history.
- Newton, A. (2014). Ambulance Service 2030: the future of paramedics.
- Pozner, C. N., Zane, R., Nelson, S. J., & Levine, M. (2004). International EMS systems: the United States: past, present, and future. Resuscitation, 60(3), 239-244.
- Nutbeam, T., Boylan, M., Leech, C., & Bosanko, C. (Eds.). (2023). ABC of prehospital emergency medicine. John Wiley & Sons.
- Brigham, P. (1993). An Evaluation of the Use of Helicopters as Air Ambulances.
- Martin, T. (2006). Aeromedical Transportation: a clinical guide. Ashgate Publishing Company.
- Brennan, J. A., & Krohmer, J. R. (Eds.). (2006). Principles of EMS systems. Jones & Bartlett Learning.