Surgical and medical emergencies on board European aircraft: a retrospective study of 10189 cases

Worldwide Regulation of the Medical Emergency Kit and First Aid Kit

INTRODUCTION: On-board medical emergencies are increasing. Different geographies have different legislation and requirements for medical emergency kits and first aid kits. A comprehensive review to compare the contents of both kits was conducted, including the International Air Transport Association, European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and Federal Aviation Administration, as well as some from other geographical areas of the globe to cover continents and regions with the highest air traffic, such as Brazil, Kenya, Australia, and Taiwan.METHODS: On June 10, 2023, a search was conducted using standardized medical terms (medical subject headings) within the PubMed® database. The relevant terms identified were "Aircraft" and "Medical Emergencies"; articles published within the last 10 yr were filtered. Subsequently, even articles published before 2013 were consulted if cited by the initial ones. The main regulatory entities' documentation was found using the Google search engine and consulted.CONCLUSIONS: It is impossible to be prepared for every emergency on board. Still, as doctors, we have a moral and ethical obligation to try to improve the outcomes of those emergencies. Getting a standardized report of every on-board emergency is crucial. That would make optimizing the items to include in the emergency and first aid kits easier. There are many similarities among the compared entities, but essential differences have been found. There is room for improvement, especially for pediatric travelers.Oliveira ATB. Worldwide regulation of the medical emergency kit and first aid kit. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(6):321-326.

What are those intermittent "S" waves?

A 69-year-old woman had three syncopal events while flying on an airplane. She was found to be profoundly bradycardic. Two 12‑lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) showed ventricular rates in the thirties. In one, the QRS complexes were narrow. In the second ECG, there were wide negative deflections following the QRS complexes. Analysis of telemetry recordings revealed the underlying mechanism and helped establish appropriate programing of an implanted pacemaker.

How Common Are Allergic Reactions During Commercial Flights? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Global passenger demand for air travel has increased by over 7% annually since 2006, with a strong recovery following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior to COVID-19, individuals with food allergies reported significant concern and anxiety over the risk of reactions when travelling by air. However, published data of in-flight medical events (IMEs) due to allergic reactions are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a systematic review with meta-analysis to estimate the incidence of IMEs due to allergic reactions on commercial flights.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and TRANSPORT databases and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies reporting IMEs of allergic etiology, published since 1980. Data were extracted in duplicate for meta-analysis, and risk of bias assessed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022384341.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. At meta-analysis, a pooled estimate of 2.2% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.6%-3.1%) of IMEs are coded as being due to allergic reactions. This may be higher in children (3.1%; 95% CI 1.5%-6.6%). The incidence of allergic IMEs at meta-analysis was 0.7 events per million passengers (95% CI 0.4-1.1). Reassuringly, the rate of allergic IMEs has been stable over the past 30 years, despite increasing passenger numbers and food allergy prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergic reactions coded as IMEs during commercial air travel are uncommon, occurring at an incidence approximately 10 to 100 times lower than that reported for accidental allergic reactions to food occurring in the community. Despite increasing passenger numbers and food allergy prevalence, the rate of allergic IMEs has not changed over the past 3 decades.

[Not a pneumothorax again! Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome: a case report]

Case discussion of a 40-year-old male patient with a history of recurrent pneumothoraces due to Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome. In addition to conservative treatment of a pneumothorax on the left side, a subtotal parietal pleurectomy on the right side was performed after recurrence of a pneumothorax 6 years later. CT of the thorax showed high-grade structural remodelling of the lung parenchyma with cystic lung lesions on both sides with a diameter of up to 7.5 cm. After exclusion of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, underlying immunological disease, unremarkable family and occupational history, Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome was suspected based on the morphological distribution pattern of the cystic lung lesions. Genetic examination helped detect a heterozygous pathogenic variant in the FLCN gene, namely c.1294_1298del;p.(Ser432Argfs*22). Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome is a rare genetic disorder clinically characterized by pulmonary cysts, fibrofolliculomas of the skin and occurrence of clustered renal tumors. In particular, the increased risk of renal malignancies and the risk of spontaneous pneumothoraces underlines the importance of early diagnosis and screening of affected patients and their families.

In-Flight Medical Emergencies Management by Anesthetist-Intensivists and Emergency Physicians

BACKGROUND: In-flight medical emergencies (IME) are challenging situations: aircraft cabins are noisy and narrow, medical supplies are scarce, and high-altitude related physiological changes may worsen chronic respiratory or cardiac conditions. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which anesthetist-intensivists and emergency physicians are aware of IME specificities.METHODS: A questionnaire containing 21 items was distributed to French anesthetist-intensivists and emergency physicians between January and May 2020 using the mailing list of the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine and the French Society of Emergency Medicine. The following topics were evaluated: high-altitude related physiological changes, medical and human resources available inside commercial aircraft, common medical incidents likely to happen on board, and previous personal experiences.RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 1064 physicians. The items corresponding to alterations in the arterial oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, and heart rate at cruising altitude were answered correctly by less than half of the participants (respectively, 3%, 42%, and 44% of the participants). Most responders (83%) were interested in a complementary training on IME management.DISCUSSION: The present study illustrates the poor knowledge in the medical community of the physiological changes induced by altitude and their consequences. In addition to offering specific theoretical courses to the medical community, placing sheets in commercial aircraft summarizing the optimal management of the main emergencies likely to happen on board might be an interesting tool.Diop S, Birnbaum R, Cook F, Mounier R. In-flight medical emergencies management by anesthetist-intensivists and emergency physicians. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2022; 93(8):633-636.

In-flight medical emergencies during commercial travel

BACKGROUND

Growing number of passengers travelling by air is associated with increased in-flight emergency medical events (IEMEs). However, there are scarce data regarding IEMEs during commercial travels. In this study, analysis of IEMEs occurring among adult and paediatric passengers during commercial international and domestic flights of a major airline company was targeted.

METHODS

Data regarding IEMEs recorded in all international and domestic flights of a major airline company between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2020 were collected. Demographics, adult and paediatric IEMEs, in-flight deaths and aircraft diversions (ADs) were analysed.

RESULTS

Total number of passengers was 177 400 748 and a number of 22 541 (0.012%) IEMEs occurred. The frequency of IEMEs per 1 million passengers was 127. The number of male patients suffering from IEMEs was 8387 (37.2%), while the number female patients was 10 853 (48.1%). Median age of adult and paediatric patients were 43, [32-57], 4, [2-10], respectively. The most common cause of IEMEs in adult patients was headache (3424 IEMEs, 15.1%) and it was fever in paediatric patients (688 IEMEs, 3.05%). Multiple symptoms were present in 8449 IEMEs (37.4%). On-board doctors managed events in more than half of IEMEs (13 295 IEMEs, 58.9%). AD was required in 255 (1.13%) IEMEs. The most common reason for AD was chest pain (45 IEMEs, 17.6%) in adult patients. The most common reason for AD in paediatric patients was epileptic seizures (nine IEMEs, 3.5%). A total of 46 (0.2%) patients, including 2 (0.008%) paediatric patients, died.

CONCLUSIONS

Majority of IEMEs are not life-threatening conditions, which can be easily managed by cabin crew or on-board doctors without AD. Multiple symptoms can be present in a patient suffering from IEME. Ground-to-air medical assistance may help optimization of diagnosis and decision for AD.

Systemic arterial hypertension and flight

Hypertension is the major preventable cause of cardiovascular disease and all-cause death. Given its overall high prevalence, hypertension would be one of our major concerns in commercial flights. Hence, the management of hypertension is of great importance. Herein, we discuss the pathophysiological factors for elevated blood pressure during flight, and we make recommendations which should be followed by the passengers and the flight crew and the physicians for trouble-free air travel.

A Comparison of In-flight and Ground-Based Emergency Medical Events on the Clinical Demand for Outreach Medical Services at Taoyuan International Airport, Taiwan

Background: Limited information is available covering all medical events managed by the airport-based outreach medical service. This study explores the clinical demand for emergency medical outreach services at Taoyuan International Airport (TIA), Taiwan.

Methods: Electronic medical records collected from TIA medical outreach services from 2017 to 2018, included passengers' profiles, flight information, events location, chief complaints, diagnosis (using ICD-9 -CM codes), and management outcomes. Medical events distribution was stratified by location and ages, and were compared statistically.

Results: Among 1,501 eligible records, there were 81.8% ground-based emergency medical events (GBME), 16.9% in-flight medical events (IFME) managed after scheduled landing, and 1.3% IFME leading to unscheduled diversion or re-entry to TIA. The top three GBME diagnoses were associated with neurological (23.3%), gastrointestinal (21.2%), and trauma-related (19.3%) conditions. The top three IFME diagnosis that prompted unscheduled landings via flight diversion or re-entry were neurological (47.4%), psychological (15.8%), and cardiovascular (10.5%). The chief complaints that prompted unscheduled landings were mostly related to neurological (42.1%), cardiovascular (26.3%), and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) (10.5%) symptoms. A higher frequency of IFME events due to dermatologic causes in patients aged ≤ 18 years compared with adults and older adults (19 vs. 1.5% and 0, respectively); and a higher frequency of IFME due to cardiovascular causes in adults ≥ 65 years compared with patients aged ≤ 65 (15.1 vs. 9%). Among all IFME patients, six out-of-hospital deaths occurred among passengers from scheduled landings and two deaths occurred among 18 IFME passengers who were transferred to local hospitals from flight diversion or re-entry. A statistically significant difference in outcomes and short-term follow-up status was found between patients with IFME and those with GBME (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Ground-based emergency medical events exceeded in-flight medical events at TIA. The most frequent events were related to neurological, gastrointestinal symptoms, or trauma. Results of this study may provide useful information for training medical outreach staff and preparing medical supplies to meet the clinical demand for airport medical outreach services.

The global incidence of in-flight medical emergencies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of approximately 1.5 billion airline passengers

BACKGROUND

Medical emergencies during short- or long-haul commercial airline flights have become more commonplace due to the aviation industry's contemporary growth, the popularization of commercial flights, and an increased aging of air travelers with significant comorbidities. However, the precise incidence of onboard medical events on commercial airlines and the most common medical conditions is unclear.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we explored the incidence of in-flight medical emergencies among airline passengers and estimated the incidence rate by physiological body system, or organ class/syndrome for emergencies that may be associated with different body systems. We limited our search to cohort studies published between 1945 to October 31, 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and official reports from the Federal Aviation Administration/International Air Transport Association, regardless of the language of publication. Only studies that evaluated the overall frequency of onboard medical events on commercial air carriers (in which they also presented the total number of annual revenue passengers) and the frequency of events by physiological body systems or organ class/syndrome were included. We excluded case reports and case series, systematic or narrative reviews, and studies addressing specific health-related conditions. Two independent investigators performed first- and second-phase study screening, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. We rated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Using a quality effect model, we meta-analyzed data associated with the incidence of in-flight medical emergencies, all-cause fatality, incidence of medical events by medical condition category, frequency of en-route diversion, presence of medical personnel on board, and the use of an automatic external defibrillator. We also extracted data regarding the cost of flight diversion.

RESULTS

Of 18 individual studies with approximately 1.5 billion passengers, 11 reported the overall incidence of in-flight medical emergencies. Low certainty of evidence suggested that the global incidence of in-flight medical emergencies was 18.2 events per million passengers (95% CI 0.5 to 53.4 per million; I² = 100%, P < 0.001, very low certainty), and an all-cause mortality rate was 0.21 per million passengers (95% CI 0 to 0.76 per million; I² = 99%, P < 0.001, low certainty). The four most common categories of medical conditions or syndromes during flight were syncope, gastrointestinal events, respiratory and neurological diagnostic groups. The diversion rate was 11.1 per 100,000 flights (95% CI 5.9 to17.6 per 100,000 flights; I² = 97%, P < 0.001), with an average cost ranging from $15,000 to $893,000 per unplanned emergency landing across studies which examined this outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In-flight medical events on commercial travels are extremely low with a corresponding very low in-flight mortality rate. Associated costs derived from en-route diversion might significantly influence airlines' budgetary equilibrium. Novel and modern standardized reporting systems or platforms should be internationally provided and enforced by health and aviation authorities to obtain higher quality patient-passengers datasets. Onboard volunteer medical providers must be aware of everyday life-threatening events during commercial flights and should consider the establishment of a connection between the aircraft and ground-based medical advisory services while assisting in-flight medical events.

Medical Events on Board Aircraft: Reducing Confusion and Misinterpretation in the Scientific Literature

INTRODUCTION: A topic in aviation medicine that attracts much attention from the scientific community as well as from the media concerns medical incidents on board commercial airline flights. It was noticed that many papers on the subject were written by authors whose specialization was outside that of aviation medicine and that they sometimes made basic errors concerning the application of scientific principles of the subject. A review was undertaken to determine if there were any patterns to the observed errors and, if so, to consider whether recommendations might be provided that could reduce their frequency.METHOD: A literature search was undertaken of MEDLINE using PubMed for English-only articles published between January 1, 1974, and February 1, 2019, employing the following search terms: air emergency, air emergencies, air passenger, air travel, aircraft, airline, aviation, commercial air, flight, and fitness to fly. In addition, other relevant papers held in the personal collection of the authors were reviewed.RESULTS: Many cases of misinterpretation or misunderstanding of aviation medicine were found, which could be classified into eight main categories: references; cabin altitude; pressure/volume relationship; other technical aspects of aircraft operations; regulations; medical events; in-flight deaths; and automated external defibrillator.CONCLUSION: Papers were identified as having questionable statements of fact or of emphasis. Such instances often appeared to result from authors being unfamiliar with the subject of aviation medicine and/or the commercial aviation environment. Simple steps could be taken by authors to reduce the future rate of such instances and recommendations are provided.Thibeault C, Evans AD. Medical events on board aircraft: reducing confusion and misinterpretation in the scientific literature. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2021; 92(4):265273.

Knowledge, confidence and attitude of primary care doctors in managing in-flight medical emergencies: a cross-sectional survey

INTRODUCTION

Medical emergencies occur at a rate of one in 604‒753 flights. Doctors travelling on commercial flights may encounter an in-flight medical emergency requiring their assistance. There is a paucity of studies on how confident primary care doctors are in managing in-flight medical emergencies. This study aimed to determine the knowledge, confidence and attitude of primary care doctors in managing in-flight medical emergencies.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted on all primary care doctors working in government health clinics in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from October 2016 to November 2016. A self-reported questionnaire was used, which included questions on demographic information, knowledge of in-flight medicine, and the attitude and confidence of primary care doctors in managing in-flight medical emergencies.

RESULTS

182 doctors completed the questionnaire (92.9% response rate). The mean knowledge score was 8.9 out of a maximum score of 20. Only 11.5% of doctors felt confident managing in-flight medical emergencies. The majority (69.2%) would assist in an in-flight medical emergency, but the readiness to assist was reduced if someone else was already helping or if they were not familiar with the emergency. Total knowledge score was positively associated with confidence in managing in-flight medical emergencies (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Only one in ten primary care doctors in this study felt confident managing in-flight medical emergencies. A higher total knowledge score of in-flight medical emergencies was positively associated with greater confidence in managing them. Educational programmes to address this gap in knowledge may be useful to improve doctors' confidence in managing in-flight medical emergencies.

On-board emergency medical equipment of European airlines

BACKGROUND

Medical emergencies frequently occur in commercial airline flights, but valid data on causes and consequences are rare. Therefore, optimal extent of onboard emergency medical equipment remains largely unknown. Whereas a minimum standard is defined in regulations, additional material is not standardized and may vary significantly between airlines.

METHODS

European airlines operating aircrafts with at least 30 seats were selected and interviewed with a 5-page written questionnaire including 81 items. Besides pre-packed and required emergency medical material, drugs, medical devices, and equipment lists were queried. If no reply was received, airlines were contacted up to three times by email and/or phone. Descriptive analysis was used for data interpretation.

RESULTS

From a total of 305 European airlines, 253 were excluded from analysis (e.g., no passenger transport). 52 airlines were contacted and data of 22 airlines were available for analysis (one airline was excluded due to insufficient data). A first aid kit is available on all airlines. 82% of airlines (18/22) reported to have a "doctor's kit" (DK) or an "Emergency Medical Kit" (EMK) onboard. 86% of airlines (19/22) provide identical equipment in all aircraft of the fleet, and 65% (14/22) airlines provide an automated external defibrillator.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas minimal required material according to European aviation regulations is provided by all airlines for medical emergencies, there are significant differences in availability of the additional material. The equipment of most airlines is not sufficient for treatment of specific emergencies according to published in-flight medical guidelines (e.g., for CPR or acute myocardial infarction).

Commercial Air Travel for Passengers With Cardiovascular Disease: Stressors of Flight and Aeromedical Impact

The exponential growth of commercial flights has resulted in a sharp rise of air travellers over the last 2 decades, including passengers with a wide range of cardiovascular conditions. Notwithstanding the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic that had set back the aviation industry for the next 1 to 2 years, air travel is expected to rebound fully by 2023-2024. Guidelines and evidence-based recommendations for safe air travel in this group vary, and physicians often encounter situations where opinions and assessments on fitness for flights are sought. This article aims to provide an overview of the stressors of commercial passenger flights with an impact on cardiovascular health for the general cardiologist and family practitioner, when assessing the suitability of such patients for flying fitness.

In-Flight Injuries Involving Children on Commercial Airline Flights

BACKGROUND

More than 3 billion passengers are transported every year on commercial airline flights worldwide, many of whom are children. The incidence of in-flight medical events (IFMEs) affecting children is largely unknown. This study seeks to characterize pediatric IFMEs, with particular focus on in-flight injuries (IFIs).

METHODS

We reviewed the records of all IFMEs from January 2009 to January 2014 involving children treated in consultation with a ground-based medical support center providing medical support to commercial airlines.

RESULTS

Among 114 222 IFMEs, we identified 12 226 (10.7%) cases involving children. In-flight medical events commonly involved gastrointestinal (35.4%), infectious (20.3%), neurological (12.2%), allergic (8.6%), and respiratory (6.3%) conditions. In addition, 400 cases (3.3%) of IFMEs involved IFIs. Subjects who sustained IFIs were younger than those involved in other medical events (3 [1-8] vs 7 [3-14] y, respectively), and lap infants were overrepresented (35.8% of IFIs vs 15.9% of other medical events). Examples of IFIs included burns, contusions, and lacerations from falls in unrestrained lap infants; fallen objects from the overhead bin; and trauma to extremities by the service cart or aisle traffic.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric IFIs are relatively infrequent given the total passenger traffic but are not negligible. Unrestrained lap children are prone to IFIs, particularly during meal service or turbulence, but not only then. Children occupying aisle seats are vulnerable to injury from fallen objects, aisle traffic, and burns from mishandled hot items. The possible protection from using in-flight child restraints might extend beyond takeoff and landing operations or during turbulence.

Spontaneous pneumothorax and air travel in Pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis: A patient survey

BACKGROUND

The optimal approach for management of spontaneous pneumothoraces (SPs) and the safety of air travel in patients with pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis (PLCH) are not well established.

METHODS

Patients with PLCH were recruited from the Rare Lung Diseases Clinic Network and the Histiocytosis Association, and surveyed about disease manifestations and safety of air travel.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients completed the survey. Median age at diagnosis of PLCH was 40 years (range: 15-67 years). Average interval between symptom onset and diagnosis was 2.9 years (range: -4 to 31 years). Twenty-two patients (23%) had at least one SP, of which 14 (64%) had at least one additional SP that showed either an ipsilateral recurrence (10 patients; 45%) or a contralateral recurrence (8 patients; 36%). Mean age at the time of first SP was 29 years. SP was the presenting manifestation that led to the diagnosis of PLCH in 19% of patients, typically after the second episode. Surgical pleurodesis reduced the recurrence rate of SP by half in comparison with conservative management (29% vs. 65%, p = 0.025). Two patients experienced an episode of SP during air travel, consistent with an air travel-related pneumothorax rate of 2.4% per patient and 0.27% per flight.

CONCLUSIONS

SP is a common manifestation of PLCH, can be seen in approximately one-fourth of the patients, and has a high recurrence risk. Surgical pleurodesis leads to a substantial reduction in the SP recurrence risk. The risk of an air travel-related SP in patients with PLCH is about 2-3 per thousand flights. TRIAL REGISTRY CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03052101.

Characterization of In-Flight Medical Events Involving Children on Commercial Airline Flights

STUDY OBJECTIVE

More than 4 billion passengers travel on commercial airline flights yearly. Although in-flight medical events involving adult passengers have been well characterized, data describing those affecting children are lacking. This study seeks to characterize pediatric in-flight medical events and their immediate outcomes, using a worldwide sample.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of all in-flight medical events from January 1, 2015, to October 31, 2016, involving children younger than 19 years treated in consultation with a ground-based medical support center providing medical support to 77 commercial airlines worldwide. We characterized these in-flight medical events and determined factors associated with the need for additional care at destination or aircraft diversion.

RESULTS

From a total of 75,587 in-flight medical events, we identified 11,719 (15.5%) involving children. Most in-flight medical events occurred on long-haul flights (76.1%), and 14% involved lap infants. In-flight care was generally provided by crew members only (88.6%), and physician (8.7%) or nurse (2.1%) passenger volunteers. Most in-flight medical events were resolved in flight (82.9%), whereas 16.5% required additional care on landing, and 0.5% led to aircraft diversion. The most common diagnostic categories were nausea or vomiting (33.9%), fever or chills (22.2%), and acute allergic reaction (5.5%). Events involving lap infants, syncope, seizures, burns, dyspnea, blunt trauma, lacerations, or congenital heart disease; those requiring the assistance of a volunteer medical provider; or those requiring the use of oxygen were positively correlated with the need for additional care after disembarkment.

CONCLUSION

Most pediatric in-flight medical events are resolved in flight, and very few lead to aircraft diversion, yet 1 in 6 cases requires additional care.

In-Flight Medical Emergencies: A Review

IMPORTANCE

In-flight medical emergencies (IMEs) are common and occur in a complex environment with limited medical resources. Health care personnel are often asked to assist affected passengers and the flight team, and many have limited experience in this environment.

OBSERVATIONS

In-flight medical emergencies are estimated to occur in approximately 1 per 604 flights, or 24 to 130 IMEs per 1 million passengers. These events happen in a unique environment, with airplane cabin pressurization equivalent to an altitude of 5000 to 8000 ft during flight, exposing patients to a low partial pressure of oxygen and low humidity. Minimum requirements for emergency medical kit equipment in the United States include an automated external defibrillator; equipment to obtain a basic assessment, hemorrhage control, and initiation of an intravenous line; and medications to treat basic conditions. Other countries have different minimum medical kit standards, and individual airlines have expanded the contents of their medical kit. The most common IMEs involve syncope or near-syncope (32.7%) and gastrointestinal (14.8%), respiratory (10.1%), and cardiovascular (7.0%) symptoms. Diversion of the aircraft from landing at the scheduled destination to a different airport because of a medical emergency occurs in an estimated 4.4% (95% CI, 4.3%-4.6%) of IMEs. Protections for medical volunteers who respond to IMEs in the United States include a Good Samaritan provision of the Aviation Medical Assistance Act and components of the Montreal Convention, although the duty to respond and legal protections vary across countries. Medical volunteers should identify their background and skills, perform an assessment, and report findings to ground-based medical support personnel through the flight crew. Ground-based recommendations ultimately guide interventions on board.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In-flight medical emergencies most commonly involve near-syncope and gastrointestinal, respiratory, and cardiovascular symptoms. Health care professionals can assist during these emergencies as part of a collaborative team involving the flight crew and ground-based physicians.

In-flight cardiac arrest and in-flight cardiopulmonary resuscitation during commercial air travel: consensus statement and supplementary treatment guideline from the German Society of Aerospace Medicine (DGLRM)

By the end of the year 2016, approximately 3 billion people worldwide travelled by commercial air transport. Between 1 out of 14,000 and 1 out of 50,000 passengers will experience acute medical problems/emergencies during a flight (i.e., in-flight medical emergency). Cardiac arrest accounts for 0.3% of all in-flight medical emergencies. So far, no specific guideline exists for the management and treatment of in-flight cardiac arrest (IFCA). A task force with clinical and investigational expertise in aviation, aviation medicine, and emergency medicine was created to develop a consensus based on scientific evidence and compiled a guideline for the management and treatment of in-flight cardiac arrests. Using the GRADE, RAND, and DELPHI methods, a systematic literature search was performed in PubMed. Specific recommendations have been developed for the treatment of IFCA. A total of 29 specific recommendations for the treatment and management of in-flight cardiac arrests were generated. The main recommendations included emergency equipments as well as communication of the emergency. Training of the crew is of utmost importance, and should ideally have a focus on CPR in aircraft. The decision for a diversion should be considered very carefully.

A Systematic Review of Pediatric and Adult In-Flight Medical Emergencies

In-flight medical emergencies (IMEs) are acute onboard events of illnesses or injuries with potential immediate risk to a passenger's short- or long-term health, or life. IMEs are significant events that are related to public safety concerns. With the increasing amount of annual air travel every year, it is expected that the number of encountered IMEs will continue to grow. Thus, it will be critical to develop and implement appropriate measures to manage IMEs with the best possible outcome. Despite the fact that most IMEs are self-limited with no serious adverse events, serious IME can lead to death, disability, or other unfavorable health outcomes, particularly as a result of suboptimal medical care. In this article, we systematically reviewed the published up-to-date evidence on the subject of in-flight emergencies with a specific focus on pediatric population.

In-flight angina pectoris; an unusual presentation

BACKGROUND

An unusual case of typical angina which occurred on a long haul flight is presented. This case is notable as this was the index presentation, with no previous symptoms prior to this. Physiological changes at altitude can be marked, and include hypoxia, tachycardia and an increase in cardiac output. These changes were enough to expose underlying angina in our patient.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 68 year old man presented with typical cardiac chest pain on a long haul flight. His symptoms first started 10-15 min after take-off and resolved on landing. This was his index presentation, and there were no similar symptoms in the past. Background history included hypercholesterolaemia and benign prostatic hypertrophy only. He led a rather sedentary lifestyle. A CT coronary angiogram showed significant disease in the proximal left anterior descending artery and proximal right coronary artery. He went on to have a coronary angiogram with invasive physiological measurements, which determined both lesions were physiologically significant. Both arteries were treated with drug eluting stents. Since treatment, he once again embarked on a long haul flight, and was completely asymptomatic.

CONCLUSION

The presentation of symptoms in this individual was rather unusual, but clearly caused by significant coronary artery disease. Potentially his sedentary lifestyle was not enough in day-to-day activities to promote anginal symptoms. When his cardiovascular system was physiologically stressed during flight, brought about by hypoxia, raised sympathetic tone and increased cardiac output, symptoms emerged. In turn, when landing, with atmospheric conditions normalised, physiological stress was removed, and symptoms resolved. Clinically therefore, one should not exclude symptoms that occur with differing physiological states, such as stress and altitude, as they are also potential triggers for myocardial ischaemia, despite absence of day-to-day symptoms.

Air Travel-Related Spontaneous Pneumothorax in Diffuse Cystic Lung Diseases

Purpose of review

Spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) is a common manifestation of patients with diffuse cystic lung diseases (DCLDs) such as lymphangieoleiomyomatosis (LAM), pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis (PLCH) and Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome (BHD). Air travel may pose an additional risk for the development of SP. Here, we summarize the literature pertaining to air travel related SP in DCLDs in order to assist patients and clinicians in appropriate decision-making with regards to air travel.

Recent Findings

Several recent studies have estimated that the per-flight risk of SP in patients with DCLDs is approximately 1%, with disease-specific risk estimates of 1.1-2.6% in LAM, 0-0.63% in BHD, and 0.37% in PLCH.

Summary

In general, it should be safe for most patients with DCLDs to undertake air travel. Patients should be counseled to seek medical attention and not board the airplane in the presence of sudden/new onset chest pain and/or dyspnea prior to boarding the plane.

Spontaneous Pneumothoraces in Patients with Birt-Hogg-Dubé Syndrome

RATIONALE

Spontaneous pneumothorax is a common complication of Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome (BHD).

OBJECTIVES

The optimal approach to treatment and prevention of BHD-associated spontaneous pneumothorax, and to advising patients with BHD regarding risk of pneumothorax associated with air travel, is not well established.

METHODS

Patients with BHD were recruited from the Rare Lung Diseases Clinic Network and the BHD Foundation and surveyed about disease manifestations and air travel experiences.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patients completed the survey. The average age at diagnosis was 47 years, with an average delay from first symptoms of 13 years. Pulmonary cysts were the most frequent phenotypic manifestation of BHD, present in 85% of patients. Spontaneous pneumothorax was the presenting manifestation that led to the diagnosis of BHD in 65% of patients, typically after the second episode (mean, 2.4 episodes). Seventy-nine (76%) of 104 patients had at least one spontaneous pneumothorax during their lifetime, and 82% had multiple pneumothoraces. Among patients with multiple pneumothoraces, 73% had an ipsilateral recurrence, and 48% had a subsequent contralateral spontaneous pneumothorax following a sentinel event. The mean ages at first and second pneumothoraces were 36.5 years (range, 14-63 yr) and 37 years (range, 20-55 yr), respectively. The average number of spontaneous pneumothoraces experienced by patients with a sentinel pneumothorax was 3.6. Pleurodesis was generally performed after the second (mean, 2.4) ipsilateral pneumothorax and reduced the ipsilateral recurrence rate by half. A total of 11 episodes of spontaneous pneumothorax occurred among eight patients either during or within the 24-hour period following air travel, consistent with an air travel-related pneumothorax rate of 8% per patient and 0.12% per flight. Prior pleurodesis reduced the occurrence of a subsequent flight-related pneumothorax.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous pneumothorax is an important, recurrent manifestation of pulmonary involvement in patients with BHD, and pleurodesis should be considered following the initial pneumothorax to reduce the risk of recurrent episodes. In general, in patients with BHD, pneumothorax occurs in about 1-2 per 1,000 flights, and the risk is lower among patients with a history of prior pleurodesis.

International Flight Considerations

Combined with the rising number of passengers, and increased capacity of larger airplanes with more long-distance domestic and international flights, with long-haul aircrafts—such as the Airbus A380 and Boeing 777 LR now capable of extending flight times to 18–20 h—it is likely that the incidence of in-flight medical emergencies will continue to increase in the coming years. International air travel in particular combines long-haul, extended flight times with unique exposures and an even more austere, secluded environment for passengers with acute and/or chronic illnesses, and suggests unique medical challenges for recognition, stabilization, treatment, diagnosis, and disposition.

Lessons learned from an in-flight medical event

Air transportation, although safe, exposes passengers to distinct physical, psychological, and physiological stressors that may be well tolerated in a healthy passenger but may trigger or exacerbate a medical event in a passenger with underlying medical problems. This article describes how a medical provider on the flight assisted with a medical emergency on a transatlantic flight.

In-flight allergic emergencies

Allergic and hypersensitivity reactions such as anaphylaxis and asthma exacerbations may occur during air travel. Although the exact incidence of in-flight asthma and allergic emergencies is not known, we have concerns that this subject has not received the attention it warrants. There is a need to provide passengers at risk and airlines with the necessary measures to prevent and manage these emergencies. A review of the epidemiology, management and approaches to prevention of allergic and asthma emergencies during air travel is presented with the goal of increasing awareness about these important, potentially preventable medical events.

Travel medicine: Part 2-Special situations

Travel should be educational, fun, and safe if the appropriate care is rendered by counseling physicians and travelers take an active role in their health. In the second paper of the 2‐part special articles, we provide a practical summary of up‐to‐date travel medicine about special situations for primary care physicians. We focus on in‐flight emergencies, pregnancy, and specific precautions for injury and infectious disease as special situations. Physicians are frequently called upon to examine patients with in‐flight emergencies, and thus, they should have knowledge and skills for effectively caring patients. Common health problems over the flights include syncope, chest pain, dyspnea, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Cautious and prudent behaviors should be recommended for travelers to prevent injury and infectious disease. Follow‐up after the return home optimizes a positive outcome.

Risk of spontaneous pneumothorax due to air travel and diving in patients with Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome

Background and objectives

Birt–Hogg–Dubé syndrome is an autosomal dominant disorder characterized by skin fibrofolliculomas, lung cysts, spontaneous pneumothorax and renal cell cancer due to germline folliculin (FLCN) mutations (Menko et al. in Lancet Oncol 10(12):1199–1206, 2009). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax in patients with BHD during or shortly after air travel and diving.

Methods

A questionnaire was sent to a cohort of 190 BHD patients and the medical files of these patients were evaluated. The diagnosis of BHD was confirmed by FLCN mutations analysis in all patients. We assessed how many spontaneous pneumothoraces (SP) occurred within 1 month after air travel or diving.

Results

In total 158 (83.2 %) patients returned the completed questionnaire. A total of 145 patients had a history of air travel. Sixty-one of them had a history of SP (42.1 %), with a mean of 2.48 episodes (range 1–10). Twenty-four (35.8 %) patients had a history of pneumothorax on both sides. Thirteen patients developed SP < 1 month after air travel (9.0 %) and two patients developed a SP < 1 month after diving (3.7 %). We found in this population of BHD patients a pneumothorax risk of 0.63 % per flight and a risk of 0.33 % per episode of diving. Symptoms possible related to SP were perceived in 30 patients (20.7 %) after air travel, respectively in ten patients (18.5 %) after diving.

Conclusion

Based on the results presented in this retrospective study, exposure of BHD patients to considerable changes in atmospheric pressure associated with flying and diving may be related to an increased risk for developing a symptomatic pneumothorax. Symptoms reported during or shortly after flying and diving might be related to the early phase of pneumothorax. An individualized advice should be given, taking also into account patients’ preferences and needs.

Inflight Emergencies During Eurasian Flights

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the incidence and status of urgent medical conditions, the attitudes of health professionals who encounter such conditions, the adequacy of medical kits and training of cabin crew in data-received-company aircrafts suggested by Aerospace Medical Association, and the demographic data of patients.

METHODS

Data were collected from medical records of a major flight company from 2011 through 2013. All patients with complete records were included in the study. Numerical variables were defined as median and interquartiles (IQR) for median, while categorical variables were defined as numbers and percentage.

RESULTS

During the study period, 10,100,000 passengers were carried by the company flights, with 1,312 (0.013%) demands for urgent medical support (UMS). The median age of the passengers who requested UMS was 45 years (IQR: 29-62). Females constituted 698 (53.2%) among the patients, and 721 (55%) patients were evaluated by medical professionals found among passengers. The most common nontraumatic complaints resulting in requests for UMS were flight anxiety (311 patients, 23.7%) and dyspnea (145 patients, 11%). The most common traumatic complaint was burns (221 patients, 16.8%) resulting from trauma during flight. A total of 22 (1.67%) emergency landings occurred for which the most frequent reasons were epilepsy (22.7%) and death (18.2%). Deaths during flights were recorded in 13 patients, whose median age was 77 years (IQR: 69-82), which was significantly higher compared to the age of patients requiring UMS (p < 0.0001). A total of 592 (45%) patients did not require any treatment for UMS. Medical kits and training were found to be sufficient according to the symptomatic treatments.

CONCLUSION

Most of the urgent cases encountered during flights can be facilitated with basic medical support. "Traumatic emergency procedures inflight medical care" would be useful for additional training. Medical professionals as passengers are significantly involved in encountered emergency situations. Adding automated external defibrillator and pulse oximetry to recommended kits and training can help facilitate staff decisions such as emergency landings and tele-assistance.

Fitness to fly in patients with lung disease

Patients with chronic lung disease may have mild hypoxemia at sea level. Some of these cases may go unrecognized, and even among those who are known to be hypoxemic, some do not use supplemental oxygen. During air travel in a hypobaric hypoxic environment, compensatory pulmonary mechanisms may be inadequate in patients with lung disease despite normal sea-level oxygen requirements. In addition, compensatory cardiovascular mechanisms may be less effective in some patients who are unable to increase cardiac output. Air travel also presents an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. Patients with cystic lung disease may also be at increased risk of pneumothorax. Although overall this risk appears to be relatively low, should a pneumothorax occur, it could present a significant challenge to the patient with chronic lung disease, particularly if hypoxemia is already present. As such, a thorough assessment of patients with chronic lung disease and cardiac disease who are contemplating air travel should be performed. The duration of the planned flight, the anticipated levels of activity, comorbid illnesses, and the presence of risk factors for venous thromboembolism are important considerations. Hypobaric hypoxic challenge testing reproduces an environment most similar to that encountered during actual air travel; however, it is not widely available. Assessment for hypoxia is otherwise best performed using a normobaric hypoxic challenge test. Patients in need of supplemental oxygen need to contact the airline and request this accommodation during flight. They should also be advised on arranging portable oxygen concentrators before air travel, and a discussion of the potential risks of travel should take place.

Intraorbital haematoma during a commercial flight: a case report

Background

Intraorbital haematoma is a rare clinical entity which can be caused by orbital traumas, neoplasms, surgeries nearby sinuses and orbit, vascular malformations, acute sinusitis, systemic abnormalities, barotrauma and valsalva maneuver.

Case Presentation

A 74-year-old male presented with sudden onset of ocular pain, upper eye lid swelling, proptosis and diplopia after a commercial flight. After complete ophthalmic ocular examination including pupillary light reflexes and laboratory examinations; computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of orbit revealed a subperiostal mass-like lesion in the right retrobulbar-extraconal region which was compatible with intraorbital haematoma. Visual acuity was not compromised so we planned a conservative approach with close observation. We administered systemic corticosteroid and topical dorzolamide/timolol combination therapy. At the first month follow-up, intraorbital haematoma resolved without significant sequelae.

Conclusion

Intraorbital haematoma can be managed by conservative approach without any intervention if it does not threat visual acuity or optic nerve. We experienced a case of intraorbital haematoma during a commercial flight. We discussed the rarity of this condition and its management.

Emergency medical equipment on board German airliners

BACKGROUND

Medical emergencies often occur on commercial airline flights, but valid data on their causes and consequences are rare. Therefore, it is unclear what emergency medical equipment is necessary. Although a minimum standard for medical equipment is defined in regulations, additional material is not standardized and may vary significantly between different airlines.

METHODS

German airlines operating aircrafts with more than 30 seats were selected and interviewed with a 5-page written questionnaire between August 2011 and January 2012. Besides pre-packed and required emergency medical material, drugs, medical devices, and equipment lists were queried. If no reply was received, airlines were contacted another three times by e-mail and/or phone. Descriptive analysis was used for data presentation and interpretation.

RESULT

From a total of 73 German airlines, 58 were excluded from analysis (eg, those not providing passenger transport). Fifteen airlines were contacted and data of 13 airlines were available for analysis (two airlines did not participate). A first aid kit was available on all airlines. Seven airlines reported having a doctor's kit, and another four provided an "emergency medical kit." Four airlines provided an automated external defibrillator (AED)/electrocardiogram (ECG). While six airlines reported providing anesthesia drugs, a laryngoscope, and endotracheal tubes, another four airlines did not provide even a resuscitator bag. One airline did not provide any material for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the minimal material required according to European aviation regulations is provided by all airlines for medical emergencies, there are significant differences in the provision of additional material. The equipment on most airlines is not sufficient for the treatment of specific emergencies according to published medical guidelines (eg, for CPR or acute myocardial infarction).

In-flight Medical Emergencies

Introduction:

Research and data regarding in-flight medical emergencies during commercial air travel are lacking. Although volunteer medical professionals are often called upon to assist, there are no guidelines or best practices to guide their actions. This paper reviews the literature quantifying and categorizing in-flight medical incidents, discusses the unique challenges posed by the in-flight environment, evaluates the legal aspects of volunteering to provide care, and suggests an approach to managing specific conditions at 30,000 feet.

Methods:

We conducted a MEDLINE search using search terms relevant to aviation medical emergencies and flight physiology. The reference lists of selected articles were reviewed to identify additional studies.

Results:

While incidence studies were limited by data availability, syncope, gastrointestinal upset, and respiratory complaints were among the most common medical events reported. Chest pain and cardiovascular events were commonly associated with flight diversion.

Conclusion:

When in-flight medical emergencies occur, volunteer physicians should have knowledge about the most common in-flight medical incidents, know what is available in on-board emergency medical kits, coordinate their therapy with the flight crew and remote resources, and provide care within their scope of practice.

Air travel and pneumothorax

The number of medical emergencies onboard aircraft is increasing as commercial air traffic increases and the general population ages, becomes more mobile, and includes individuals with serious medical conditions. Travelers with respiratory diseases are at particular risk for in-flight events because exposure to lower atmospheric pressure in a pressurized cabin at cruising altitude may result in not only hypoxemia but also pneumothorax due to gas expansion within enclosed pulmonary parenchymal spaces based on Boyle's law. Risks of pneumothorax during air travel pertain particularly to those patients with cystic lung diseases, recent pneumothorax or thoracic surgery, and chronic pneumothorax. Currently available guidelines are admittedly based on sparse data and include recommendations to delay air travel for 1 to 3 weeks after thoracic surgery or resolution of the pneumothorax. One of these guidelines declares existing pneumothorax to be an absolute contraindication to air travel although there are reports of uneventful air travel for those with chronic stable pneumothorax. In this article, we review the available data regarding pneumothorax and air travel that consist mostly of case reports and retrospective surveys. There is clearly a need for additional data that will inform decisions regarding air travel for patients at risk for pneumothorax, including those with recent thoracic surgery and transthoracic needle biopsy.

Managing patients with stable respiratory disease planning air travel: a primary care summary of the British Thoracic Society recommendations

Air travel poses medical challenges to passengers with respiratory disease, principally because of exposure to a hypobaric environment. In 2002 the British Thoracic Society published recommendations for adults and children with respiratory disease planning air travel, with a web update in 2004. New full recommendations and a summary were published in 2011, containing key recommendations for the assessment of high-risk patients and identification of those likely to require in-flight supplemental oxygen. This paper highlights the aspects of particular relevance to primary care practitioners with the following key points: (1) At cabin altitudes of 8000 feet (the usual upper limit of in-flight cabin pressure, equivalent to 0.75 atmospheres) the partial pressure of oxygen falls to the equivalent of breathing 15.1% oxygen at sea level. Arterial oxygen tension falls in all passengers; in patients with respiratory disease, altitude may worsen preexisting hypoxaemia. (2) Altitude exposure also influences the volume of any air in cavities, where pressure x volume remain constant (Boyle's law), so that a pneumothorax or closed lung bulla will expand and may cause respiratory distress. Similarly, barotrauma may affect the middle ear or sinuses if these cavities fail to equilibrate. (3) Patients with respiratory disease require clinical assessment and advice before air travel to: (a) optimise usual care; (b) consider contraindications to travel and possible need for in-flight oxygen; (c) consider the need for secondary care referral for further assessment; (d) discuss the risk of venous thromboembolism; and (e) discuss forward planning for the journey.

What does the law say to Good Samaritans?: A review of Good Samaritan statutes in 50 states and on US airlines

Physicians may encounter medical emergencies outside a hospital or clinical setting, such as on an airplane or at a sporting event. Physicians, particularly critical care physicians, should feel a call of duty to assist in a medical emergency and may do so without complete knowledge of existing laws for protection. The intent of this article is to encourage physicians to have a detailed awareness of Good Samaritan laws in the United States. The authors reviewed and summarized the Aviation Medical Assistance Act (AMAA) as well as the Good Samaritan laws and external defibrillator laws in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Physicians have an ethical duty to provide appropriate emergency care outside hospital or clinical settings and, therefore, should be aware of applicable protective laws. On airplanes, the AMAA provides protection to those physicians acting in Good Samaritan roles on airlines registered in the United States. On the ground, physicians should understand that statutes exist in all jurisdictions to protect Good Samaritans from liability in medical emergencies and in the use of defibrillators. Although there are common elements, each state has its own unique statutory language protecting physicians licensed in that state. All states except Kentucky have statutory language providing immunity to physicians licensed in any other state as well. Some states have interesting statutes relative to other aspects of medical emergency care. A physician entrusted to practice medicine by society and law should be willing to provide appropriate medical care wherever needed.

Outcomes of medical emergencies on commercial airline flights

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, 2.75 billion passengers fly on commercial airlines annually. When in-flight medical emergencies occur, access to care is limited. We describe in-flight medical emergencies and the outcomes of these events.

METHODS

We reviewed records of in-flight medical emergency calls from five domestic and international airlines to a physician-directed medical communications center from January 1, 2008, through October 31, 2010. We characterized the most common medical problems and the type of on-board assistance rendered. We determined the incidence of and factors associated with unscheduled aircraft diversion, transport to a hospital, and hospital admission, and we determined the incidence of death.

RESULTS

There were 11,920 in-flight medical emergencies resulting in calls to the center (1 medical emergency per 604 flights). The most common problems were syncope or presyncope (37.4% of cases), respiratory symptoms (12.1%), and nausea or vomiting (9.5%). Physician passengers provided medical assistance in 48.1% of in-flight medical emergencies, and aircraft diversion occurred in 7.3%. Of 10,914 patients for whom postflight follow-up data were available, 25.8% were transported to a hospital by emergency-medical-service personnel, 8.6% were admitted, and 0.3% died. The most common triggers for admission were possible stroke (odds ratio, 3.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88 to 6.03), respiratory symptoms (odds ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.06), and cardiac symptoms (odds ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Most in-flight medical emergencies were related to syncope, respiratory symptoms, or gastrointestinal symptoms, and a physician was frequently the responding medical volunteer. Few in-flight medical emergencies resulted in diversion of aircraft or death; one fourth of passengers who had an in-flight medical emergency underwent additional evaluation in a hospital. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.).

[Preparing patients with chronic pulmonary disease for air travel]

Flying is the most important way of travelling in the continually growing international tourism. Number of passengers and those with preexisting diseases, mainly with cardiopulmonary problems, is increasing over years. One of the main tasks of the pre-travel advice is to assess tolerance to hypoxia of the traveler, and specify the necessity, as well as the type and volume of supplementary oxygen therapy. It is indispensable to know the cabin-environment and impact of that on the travelers' health. Travel medicine specialist has to be aware of the examinations which provide information for the appropriate decision on the fit-to-fly condition of the patient. The physician who prepares the patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for repatriation by regular flight and the escorting doctor have to be fully aware of the possibilities, modalities, advantages and contraindications of the on-board oxygen supply and therapy. In this review, the authors give a summary of literature data, outline the tools of in-flight oxygen therapy as well as discuss possibilities for the preflight assessment of patients' condition including blood gas parameters required for safe air travel, as recommended in international medical literature. The preparation process for repatriation of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is also discussed.

Medical emergencies on board commercial airlines: is documentation as expected?

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to perform a descriptive, content-based analysis on the different forms of documentation for in-flight medical emergencies that are currently provided in the emergency medical kits on board commercial airlines.

Methods

Passenger airlines in the World Airline Directory were contacted between March and May 2011. For each participating airline, sample in-flight medical emergency documentation forms were obtained. All items in the sample documentation forms were subjected to a descriptive analysis and compared to a sample "medical incident report" form published by the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

Results

A total of 1,318 airlines were contacted. Ten airlines agreed to participate in the study and provided a copy of their documentation forms. A descriptive analysis revealed a total of 199 different items, which were summarized into five sub-categories: non-medical data (63), signs and symptoms (68), diagnosis (26), treatment (22) and outcome (20).

Conclusions

The data in this study illustrate a large variation in the documentation of in-flight medical emergencies by different airlines. A higher degree of standardization is preferable to increase the data quality in epidemiologic aeromedical research in the future.

Emergency medical kits on board commercial aircraft: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

In cases of critical medical situations on board commercial aircraft, access to emergency medical kits can be lifesaving. Thus, this comparative study investigated acute care medication and equipment supplied in emergency medical kits on board both low-cost carriers and full-service carriers.

METHODS

Thirty-two European airlines (sixteen low-cost carriers and sixteen full-service-carriers) were asked to provide anonymous data on the contents of their emergency medical kits. All emergency medical equipment and medication carried on board were subject to a descriptive analysis with regards to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards for emergency medical kits, as well as variation and differences between low-cost carriers and full-service carriers.

RESULTS

A total of twelve airlines (seven full-service carriers and five low-cost carriers) participated in this study. None complied with ICAO standards. Emergency medical kits from both full-service carriers and low-cost carriers exhibited a high degree of variability. Two European low-cost carriers were assessed as being insufficiently equipped for a medical emergency requiring acute care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the high degree of variability in the contents of emergency medical kits. Additionally, some airlines were equipped insufficiently for a critical medical situation on board their aircraft. Frequent checks of national authorities and further evaluation of acute care equipment are required to prepare for potentially life-threatening critical conditions occurring in special environments, such as in airplane during flight.