ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Interhospital transfer by air (IHTA) represents the majority of helicopter air ambulance transports in the United States, but the evaluation of what factors are associated with utilization has been limited. We aimed to assess the association of geographic distance and hospital characteristics (including patient volume) with the use of IHTA. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective study of helicopter flight request data from 2018 provided by a convenience sample of 4 critical care transport medicine programs in 3 US census regions. Nonfederal referring hospitals located in the home state of the associated critical care transport medicine program and within 100 miles of the primary receiving facility in the region were included if complete data were available. We fit a Poisson principal component regression model incorporating geographic distance, the number of emergency department visits, the number of hospital discharges, case mix index, the number of intensive care unit beds, and the number of general beds and tested the association of the variables with helicopter emergency medical services utilization. RESULTS: A total of 106 referring hospitals were analyzed, 21 of which were hospitals identified as having a consistent request pattern. Using the hospitals with a consistent referral pattern, geographic distance had a significant positive association with flight request volume. Other variables, including emergency department visit volume, were not associated. Overall, the included variables offered poor explanatory power for the observed variation between referring facilities in the use of IHTA (r2 = 0.09). Predicted flights based on the principal component regression model for all referring hospitals suggested the majority of referring hospitals used multiple flight programs. CONCLUSION: Geographic distance is associated with the use of IHTA. Unexpectedly, most basic hospital characteristics are not associated with the use of IHTA, and the degree of variation between referring facilities that is explained by patient volume is limited. The evaluation of nonhospital factors, such as the density and availability of critical care or advanced life support ground emergency medical services resources, is needed.
