Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Kim, J., Heo, Y., Lee, J. C., Baek, S., Kim, Y., Moon, J., ... & Jung, K. (2015). Effective transport for
trauma patients under current circumstances in Korea: a single institution analysis of treatment
outcomes for trauma patients transported via the domestic 119 service. Journal of Korean
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330491/
This source is an analysis of a 38 month study, from March 2011 to May 2014, conducted
in Korea regarding the transportation of blunt trauma victims either by ground ambulance
(GAMB) or by helicopter emergency services (HEMS). The study also explored differences
between patient demographics, transport time, injury severity score (ISS), and causes of injury.
The results showed that HEMS was an overall more beneficial mode of transportation for blunt
trauma victims compared to GAMB. Out of 1,626 patients who were victims of blunt trauma and
included in the study, 1,547 were transported via GAMB and 79 were transported via HEMS.
The study shows that out of those who were transported with GAMB, 1,400 patients survived,
yielding a survival rate of 90.5%. This is 0.9% lower than the predicted probability of survival
determined by the trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) of the major trauma outcome study
(MTOS), which was 91.4%. The study also reveals that out of those who were transported with
HEMS, 75 survived, giving way to a survival rate of 94.9%. This is 3.5% higher than the MTOS
rate. Though it took longer for people to transported via helicopter (60 minutes) than it did to be
transported by ambulance (47 minutes), both were within the golden hour (the time in which the
within the golden hour). Several factors can explain the difference between the time it took to
transport via helicopter than via ambulance. For example, helicopters are typically used to
transport a victim to a trauma center or hospital from more rural areas, where the nearest hospital
is distant, thus taking a longer time to arrive. Ambulances are generally used in urban areas,
where hospitals and trauma centers are closer. In addition, helicopters take time to take off and
land, which contribute to the time it takes to get from the scene to treatment. The study analysis
also mentions that the HEMS group had a significantly higher proportion of men (78.5% vs.
67.2%), and that 49.0% of trauma victims were involved in motor vehicle accidents. Seven-
hundred sixty-six of those patients were transported via GAMS, while 31 were airlifted. Overall,
the article encourages the integration of HEMS into the Korean trauma transportation system and
The authors of this article, Jiyoung Kim, Yunjung Heo, John CJ Lee, Sukja Baek,
Younghwan Kim, Jonghwan Moon, Seok Hwa Youn, Heejung Wang, Yo Huh and Kyoungwon
Jung are all qualified to write about the transportation of trauma victims due to their collective
experiences and credentials. As an example, Jiyoung Kim, John CJ Lee, Sukja Baek,
Younghwan Kim, Jonghwan Moon, Seok Hwa Youn, Heejung Wang work in the Department of
Surgery at Ajou University in Suwon, Korea. Yunjung Heo is employed in the Department of
Medical Humanities and Social Medicine at Ajou University in Suwon, Korea, and Yo Huh
Suwon, Korea. Kyoungwon Jung is the corresponding author. The article lists a telephone
number, fax number, and email at which the authors can be reached. It is all located on a .gov
website- the National Center for Biotechnology Information-, and is in association with the
Furthermore, the article was published online in 2015, which adheres to the five-year time span
alloted for science articles. The study itself was conducted from 2011-2014. Although it began
outside of the five-year span, it ended within it, and the information acquired from the study is
still relevant. The information from the study was all thoroughly evaluated and addressed, from
interpreting the overarching, basic results (whether HEMS of GAMB was a more effective mode
of transportation), to examining the other aspects of the study, such as what type of accident
occurred most often and by what age group, the costliness and availability of helicopters in
Korea, and the locations from which patients were transported (urban versus rural). The authors
presented a claim and reasoning, and evidence from the study to support their claim. They were
fairly unbiased in their evaluation of the results of the 38-month study (there may be some bias
in an attempt to convince readers to advocate for a larger presence of HEMS) and addressed all
sides of the argument surrounding HEMS and GAMB. For example, though the authors focused
primarily on encouraging the integration of HEMS into their country’s trauma patient care
system, they addressed the fact that people are concerned with the trade-offs of using HEMS
more often, such as their cost and safety. In order to do so, they pulled statistics from the
Emergency Medical Annual Report published by the National Emergency Medical Center. Other
information from the article (besides the information from the study) can be corroborated by
various sources, such as Present Situation of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) in
Korea by C. Lee, J. Cho, H. Yang, J. Kim, W. Park, and G. Lee. There is also a lengthy list of
reference sources at the bottom of the article that one could refer to for corroboration, including
Preliminary study on the establishment of regional trauma center and an operation model in
Korea by Kim Y. and The impact of a rotorcraft aeromedical emergency care service on trauma
mortality by Baxt WG and Moody P. This article was likely intended for scholars and other
educated people as well as authoritative figures. The authors want to convey to the reader that
the trauma transportation system should be altered to incorporate HEMS and allow for active
initial involvement of medical personnel in an attempt to change the existing system in Korea.
The audience is an appropriate one to receive this message, as scholars will be able to influence
others and possibly perform additional studies, and authoritative figures have the power to
change the system already in place. Overall, this article provides a mostly unbiased evaluation of
Annotated Bib 2:
Buchanan, I. M., Coates, A., & Sne, N. (2016, March 16). Does Mode of Transport Confer a
Mortality Benefit in Trauma Patients? Characteristics and Outcomes at an Ontario Lead Trauma
Hospital. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-
emergency-medicine/article/does-mode-of-transport-confer-a-mortality-benefit-in-trauma-
patients-characteristics-and-outcomes-at-an-ontario-lead-trauma-
hospital/0050794F837EA4D4BB17891D4E2AF579/core-reader#
This source is an analysis of an 18 year heterogeneous study that took place in Ontario,
Canada surrounding the difference in mortality rate of trauma patients who they were transported
via rotor-wing transport and via ground transport. The study constituted of people who were over
18 with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of greater than 12, and who were directly transported
from the scene to a Lead Trauma Hospital (LTH). There were a total of 3,146 trauma patients in
the study cohort after they were tested for eligibility. Of the 3,146 victims, 2,759 (87.7%)
patients were transported by ground transportation and 387 (12.3%) were transported by rotor-
wing aircraft. The patients who were transported via helicopter had a lower mortality rate than
those who were transported via ambulance (8.8% vs. 16.1%), though those who were airlifted
were shown to be more severely injured than those who transported by ground. The mortality
rate was lower than expected for helicopter transport and the mortality rate was higher than
predicted for ground transport. Predictions were made using the TRISS-L method, and were
14.7% for ground transport and 14.0 for air transport. In addition, the extrication time (from the
time the call was made to the time the patient’s arrived at LTH) of the ground-transported
patients was significantly shorter than that of the rotor-wing-transported patients; the time for
ground-transported patients was 45 minutes, whereas the time for rotor-wing-transported patients
was 73 minutes. The study also revealed that the most common cause of traumatic injury was
motor vehicle collision and the median age of the test cohort was 47 years old. The authors of the
article ultimately concluded that there were far too many factors to make an accurate claim about
the mortality rates of trauma patients based on their transportation, and that there were additional
studies that would have to be conducted to come to a truly accurate conclusion about what
transportation method was truly superior and what triage of patients should be established to
The authors of this article, Ian M. Buchanan, Angela Coates and Niv Sne are all qualified
to evaluate the study regarding the transportation of trauma victims due to their collective
University in Hamilton, Ontario, Angela Coates is employed in the Trauma Program at Hamilton
General Hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, and Niv Sne is both employed in the Trauma Program at
Hamilton General Hospital in Hamilton, Ontario and in the Department of General Surgery at
McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. This analysis was published in September 2016,
thereby following the 5-year timespan alloted for science articles and making this one current on
the topic of emergency transportation systems. The authors thoroughly evaluated the data and
covered both broad and deep aspects of the topic; they first addressed the fundamental results
and then delved into the more specific outcomes of the study. The article was completely
unbiased, and addressed all sides of the argument. For example, the authors concluded that,
though helicopters resulted in a decreased mortality rate despite a higher level of injury, there
were many other aspects of the study that needed further experimentation on in order to come to
a proper conclusion on the matter. They also thoroughly explained why some of the results that
appeared in the study occurred. Nonetheless, the information was accurate, as can be
corroborated by many sources. According to the article, trauma is the main cause of death in
individuals under the age of 44 in North America, and that unintentional injury is the fifth
leading cause of death in all ages and from people all over the world. That information can be
corroborated by sources that the author cite in their references list, such as the World Health
Organization, making the information in the article accurate. The first statistic mentioned above
cannot be corroborated by the source listed in the authors’ citation, as the website cannot be
accessed. This lessens the accuracy of the article, though not by much, as the statistic can be
found on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website. The purpose of this
article is to inform highly-educated people about the use of different transportation methods for
trauma victims. The audience is implied with the use of advanced vocabulary and specialized
terms used in emergency medicine. The article is appropriate for the audience because it will
inform highly-educated people about the effectiveness of the transportation system in Ontario
and may lead them to conduct a study on their own. Overall, this article thoroughly analyzed the
study in an unbiased fashion. Though authors did not come to an absolute conclusion, the study