Skip to content

Benefit of the FLYing Transport of Patients Requiring Mobile Intensive Care Unit

Benefit of the FLYing Transport of Patients Requiring Mobile Intensive Care Unit

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04578054
Acronym
FLY-MICU
Enrollment
5000
Registered
2020-10-08
Start date
2020-07-01
Completion date
2025-07-01
Last updated
2020-10-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, Transport, Stress, Psychological

Keywords

Stress, Psychological, emergency Medicine, transport, critical care

Brief summary

Patient care who requires fast and intensive care by a mobile intensive care unit in a rescue helicopter is a common practice in Auvergne since more than 3 years. Indeed, a complete team (nurse and emergency physician) is on Dragon 63 and HeliSMUR 63 (SMUR = emergency medical services ). There are multiple fields of action, with a primary rescue activity (patient care directly at the site of the operation) but also secondary transport (transfer of patients from one hospital to another). This allows a reduction in transport time and therefore unavailability of the MICU team in general hospitals, which are in short supply of attending physicians. In addition, this allows patients to be repatriated to the Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital Center, which is the reference center for many pathologies and has the Level 3 adult and pediatric Trauma Center.

Detailed description

This is an observational study using a REDCap® questionnaire via an internet link, which will be distributed by any means (institution mailing lists via a referent, flash codes distributed to physicians, etc.). The questionnaire will assess the type of medicalisation, the type of activity, the different hours of intervention, the age, the type and the severity of the patient's disease, the type of care practiced and the stress of the physician.

Interventions

OTHERFlying transport

Patient care who requires flying transport

Sponsors

UMR CNRS 6024 LaPSCo, Clermont-Ferrand, France
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Every Emergency Physician that participate to the Helicopter rescue

Exclusion criteria

* Every Emergency Physician non-voluntary to participate

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
StressDay 1stress level will be assessed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 (0 the lowest stress and 10 the highest)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Severity of the diseaseDay 1Severity of the disease that need MICU team for the care measure by Classification Clinique des Malades aux Urgence CCMU scale (1 to 5 ; 1 is the lowest problem and 5 the severest ; + P : Psychiatric + D : death at the arrival, no reanimation)
Duration of the careDay 1Every schedules of the care : departure from Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, arrival at the victim, departure from the accident or take care place, arrival at Clermont-Ferrand university hospital, time of the patient transmission, time of disponibility

Countries

France

Contacts

Primary ContactLise LACLAUTRE
promo_interne_drci@chu-clermontferrand.fr0473751195

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026