News
2015; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 37; Issue: 9 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1097/01.eem.0000471518.70764.7d
ISSN1552-3624
Autores ResumoFigure: Watch a video simulation of how Alex Momont's drone could be used to save a life at http://bit.ly/1h0ranp.A 2014 survey analysis in the Journal of Emergency Medical Services concluded that EMS agencies in the 200 most populous U.S. cities are improving patient care despite domestic economic hardships, which is a stark contrast to a 2005 USA Today analysis that the country's EMS systems were “fragmented, inconsistent, and slow.” (JEMS February 2014; http://bit.ly/1S8F4Ew; USA Today May 20, 2005; http://usat.ly/1g3vLET.) What these studies don't consider, however, is the drone, a possible solution to the modern challenges of helping people in places ambulances and helicopters can't reach, or at least, would have more difficulty obtaining access. After all, if Amazon is doing it, why can't the medical field get in on the action? Alec Momont, a Belgian designer working for the design firm frog, thinks it can, so he developed a drone that can fly a resuscitating defibrillator at 60 miles per hour within a range of 4.6 square miles. The idea is that rescuers can talk to people at the scene through a microphone, walking them through how to apply defibrillating pads and observing the scene through a camera. And what about domestically? The U.S. Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) has strict regulations in place for drone use, where essentially the only use for them right now is fun. The agency's concerns for medical drones are quite valid, said Donald Jenkins, MD, a professor of surgery and the trauma medical director at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. “If you put a large unmanned aerial vehicle in the sky, how do you avoid it from taking [something] out or being taken out if it collides with an overpass? It could get out of contact with the controller, start doing its own thing, and crash, too. These are the concerns the FAA has, and rightfully so, in populated areas,” he said. But Dr. Jenkins, who coauthored a consensus study on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for medical product transport, said he thinks the benefits of using drones to deliver blood or other medical products outweigh the risks. “You would put almost no one's life at risk. You could envision the bad scenario where a drone goes down and hurts somebody. But I think that would not be a common event. I think the benefit would outweigh the risk. “In this particular scenario, we'd be talking about flying a drone through relatively unpopulated areas,” said Dr. Jenkins of his study that took place in the upper Midwest. Howard K. Mell, MD, the EMS director for EmCare North Division in Ohio, said he thinks any realistic implementation of drone use in substitution of EMS is far into the future. “I think we have to look at its ability to provide a life-saving treatment that's simple enough for the layperson to understand and utilize and be urgent enough to be dropped in by a drone,” he said. This could be applicable for AEDs and EpiPens at minimum and in the near future, Dr. Mell said. “These might have validity sooner than five years from now. With EpiPens, think about hikers on campgrounds. Can we air drop one via drone? You could probably do that fairly soon if you're able to organize it. I would imagine our current technology could handle the weight of the EpiPen, and we'd merely need a way to dispatch.” Even if a camera is attached to a drone with EMS assistance that couldn't get there as quickly, Dr. Mell said he doesn't see the added benefit of drone technology. “I would question whether other technology would be more rapidly available than the drone. If radio waves for drones can get there, so can cell phone waves. So I don't know what the drone brings as opposed to most EMS being done by video phone,” he said. The reality of medical drones is still far from being implemented, and Dr. Jenkins said he thinks it's important for health care providers to start a conversation about its possibilities and ultimately, reach out to the federal government. “There are companies out there that have commercially available drones, but no one has really come forth and said this would be specific to medical. There's going to have to be some corporate buy-in to this to realize that there is this potentially untapped market. Once you let that force kick in, there'll be 20 companies with medical drones and ways of doing things. “I think that health care providers, especially those in critical access and remote areas, really need to think about this and talk about this. I think this needs to be brought up at society meetings where we're dealing with conditions where there's sensitive time management — in stroke, in STEMI, and trauma — and raise an awareness with our elected officials that when you're thinking about modifying legislation as it relates to unmanned aerial vehicles, don't leave the medical people out,” he said. Share this article on Twitter and Facebook. Access the links in EMN by reading this on our website or in our free iPad app, both available at www.EM-News.com. Comments? Write to us at [email protected].
Referência(s)