Trade-offs in emergency transport protocols for access to hip fracture management: a geospatial analysis of selective versus standard transfer in Ontario long-term care

ObjectivesFor suspected hip fractures, prehospital protocols directing patients to an orthopaedic centre rather than the nearest emergency department (ED) could reduce time-to-surgery but may impact EMS travel burden. This study evaluates the impact of transfer protocols by quantifying transport to hospitals from long term care (LTC) facilities across Ontario. MethodsA retrospective cross-sectional analysis of all Ontario LTC facilities and hospitals was performed. Two protocols were modeled: standard transfer to the nearest ED with subsequent transfer if required, and selective transfer based on Collingwood Hip Fracture Rule prehospital screening1directly to the nearest orthopaedic services (orthoED). Median one-way travel distances were calculated from Google Maps. ResultsIn Ontario, 15.4% of LTC residents require hospital destination decisions because their nearest ED lacks orthopaedic services; for these facilities, median distances were 2.7km to the ED and 36.0km to the orthoED. Among the 52 LTC facilities where selective transfer was distance-optimal, it substantially reduced travel for patients with hip fracture (31.1km vs 49.6km; P<.01) while only modestly increasing travel for patients without hip fracture. Where standard transfer was distance-optimal, little travel difference was noted for patients with hip fracture, however false positive screened patients traveled significantly further to an orthoED. Greatest negative consequences of selective transfer lie in the 1.3% of residents living farthest (>100km) from an orthoED. ConclusionsEMS direct transportation to hospitals with orthopaedics may improve hip fracture care but can increase EMS burden due to patients identified falsely as having a hip fracture, particularly in remote communities.