To provide a descriptive analysis of the prehospital emergency medical transportation system operating in and around a major Bosnian city, and to discuss the effect of the war on that transportation system.

A prospective, consecutive sample study.

The largest tertiary-care referral hospital currently operating in central Bosnia.

158 consecutive patients who sought care in the trauma and medical receiving rooms at Zenica Hospital.

Patients were surveyed as to time of transportation to the site of first medical care and to Zenica Hospital, and modes of transportation used.

Time to transport to first care within the city of Zenica is 30±21 minutes. Time to transport to Zenica Hospital from within Zenica is 51±39 minutes. Time to transport to first care outside of Zenica is 77±56 minutes. Time to transport to Zenica Hospital from outside the city of Zenica is 178±94 minutes. The prehospital emergency medical service was used in 11.7% of cases reviewed.

The majority of patients with major injury and illness are unable to obtain prehospital transportation and medical care through informal modes of transportation. The existing prehospital emergency medical services system is inadequate for the numbers of patients requiring such services, and transportation time from outside the city of study is especially prolonged.

Oral endotracheal intubation (ETI) is the preferred method of controlling the airway in critically ill or injured patients. It was postulated that time could be saved if intubation was performed in the ambulance en route to the hospital. This study was designed to determine whether the ambulance environment adversely affected the ability of emergency medical technicians at the advanced-intermediate level (EMT-AI) to perform oral ETI.

The restrictive environment of a moving ambulance would affect adversely the ability of EMT-AIs to perform ETI compared with a controlled setting. This would result in a significant increase in the time necessary to perform ETI in the ambulance compared with a controlled setting not complicated by restrictive space and motion.

Twenty on-duty EMT-AIs were recruited to volunteer for this prospective, nonrandomized, nonblinded trial. All participants performed three consecutive oral ETIs on an airway mannequin in two settings: 1) in the back of a moving ambulance; and 2) on a table in the rescue squad station. Of the participants, 10 performed the intubations in the ambulance first; the remainder performed the intubations at the station first. Time for intubation with the mannequin was recorded by stopwatch. The mean times for intubation in both settings were compared by Student's t-test (p<0.05).

All intubation attempts were successful. The mean time for intubation in the station was 13.0±3.4 seconds. The mean time in the ambulance setting was 13.2±5.3 seconds. There was no significant difference between the intubation times in the two settings (p = 0.88).

The environment of a moving ambulance does not appear to hinder the ability of EMT-AIs to perform oral ETI in a laboratory setting with a mannequin model.