Skip to main content An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Here's how you know Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Search Log in Dashboard Publications Account settings Log out Search… Search NCBI Primary site navigation Search Logged in as: Dashboard Publications Account settings Log in Search PMC Full-Text Archive Search in PMC Journal List User Guide PERMALINK Copy As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice Healthcare (Basel) . 2026 Apr 4;14(7):946. doi: 10.3390/healthcare14070946 Search in PMC Search in PubMed View in NLM Catalog Add to search Association Between Rurality and Mortality: Observational Study of Spanish and United States Prehospital Emergency Care Cohorts Álvaro Astasio-Picado Álvaro Astasio-Picado 1 Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Virgen del Puerto, 10600 Plasencia, Spain; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) Validation, Data curation Find articles by Álvaro Astasio-Picado 1, 2 , José Luis Martín-Conty José Luis Martín-Conty 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 3 Technological Innovation Applied to Health Research Group (ITAS Group), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of de Castilla-La Mancha, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain 4 Evaluación de Cuidados de Salud (ECUSAL), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Castilla-La Mancha (IDISCAM), 45004 Toledo, Spain Methodology, Investigation Find articles by José Luis Martín-Conty 2, 3, 4 , Begoña Polonio-López Begoña Polonio-López 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 3 Technological Innovation Applied to Health Research Group (ITAS Group), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of de Castilla-La Mancha, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain 4 Evaluación de Cuidados de Salud (ECUSAL), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Castilla-La Mancha (IDISCAM), 45004 Toledo, Spain Resources, Visualization Find articles by Begoña Polonio-López 2, 3, 4 , Cristina Rivera-Picón Cristina Rivera-Picón 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 4 Evaluación de Cuidados de Salud (ECUSAL), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Castilla-La Mancha (IDISCAM), 45004 Toledo, Spain Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Project administration Find articles by Cristina Rivera-Picón 2, 4, * , Juan J Bernal-Jiménez Juan J Bernal-Jiménez 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 3 Technological Innovation Applied to Health Research Group (ITAS Group), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of de Castilla-La Mancha, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain Investigation, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Juan J Bernal-Jiménez 2, 3 , Paula Álvarez Buitrago Paula Álvarez Buitrago 5 Anaesthesia and Resuscitation Service, Complejo Hospitalario de Toledo, 45007 Toledo, Spain; [email protected] Methodology, Visualization Find articles by Paula Álvarez Buitrago 5 , Jorge García-Criado Jorge García-Criado 6 Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] 7 Castilla-Leon Health Service, Sanidad Castilla y Leon, University Hospital of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] Validation, Data curation Find articles by Jorge García-Criado 6, 7 , María Cubillo-Jiménez María Cubillo-Jiménez 7 Castilla-Leon Health Service, Sanidad Castilla y Leon, University Hospital of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] Software, Resources Find articles by María Cubillo-Jiménez 7 , Juan F Delgado Benito Juan F Delgado Benito 8 Advanced Life Support, Emergency Medical Services (SACYL), 47007 Valladolid, Spain; [email protected] (J.F.D.B.); [email protected] (F.M.-R.) Methodology, Software, Investigation Find articles by Juan F Delgado Benito 8 , Francisco Martín-Rodríguez Francisco Martín-Rodríguez 8 Advanced Life Support, Emergency Medical Services (SACYL), 47007 Valladolid, Spain; [email protected] (J.F.D.B.); [email protected] (F.M.-R.) 9 Faculty of Medicine, University of Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain Software, Investigation, Funding acquisition Find articles by Francisco Martín-Rodríguez 8, 9, †, ‡ , Ancor Sanz-García Ancor Sanz-García 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 3 Technological Innovation Applied to Health Research Group (ITAS Group), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of de Castilla-La Mancha, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain 4 Evaluación de Cuidados de Salud (ECUSAL), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Castilla-La Mancha (IDISCAM), 45004 Toledo, Spain Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft Find articles by Ancor Sanz-García 2, 3, 4, *, † Editors: Hideo Inaba , Christian Napoli Author information Article notes Copyright and License information 1 Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Virgen del Puerto, 10600 Plasencia, Spain; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla–La Mancha (UCLM), 45600 Talavera, [email protected] (B.P.-L.); [email protected] (J.J.B.-J.) 3 Technological Innovation Applied to Health Research Group (ITAS Group), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of de Castilla-La Mancha, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain 4 Evaluación de Cuidados de Salud (ECUSAL), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Castilla-La Mancha (IDISCAM), 45004 Toledo, Spain 5 Anaesthesia and Resuscitation Service, Complejo Hospitalario de Toledo, 45007 Toledo, Spain; [email protected] 6 Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] 7 Castilla-Leon Health Service, Sanidad Castilla y Leon, University Hospital of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] 8 Advanced Life Support, Emergency Medical Services (SACYL), 47007 Valladolid, Spain; [email protected] (J.F.D.B.); [email protected] (F.M.-R.) 9 Faculty of Medicine, University of Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] (C.R.-P.); [email protected] (A.S.-G.); Tel.: +34-925-721-010 (C.R.-P. & A.S.-G.) † These authors contributed equally to this work. ‡ Joint last authors. Roles Álvaro Astasio-Picado : Validation, Data curation José Luis Martín-Conty : Methodology, Investigation Begoña Polonio-López : Resources, Visualization Cristina Rivera-Picón : Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Project administration Juan J Bernal-Jiménez : Investigation, Writing – review & editing Paula Álvarez Buitrago : Methodology, Visualization Jorge García-Criado : Validation, Data curation María Cubillo-Jiménez : Software, Resources Juan F Delgado Benito : Methodology, Software, Investigation Francisco Martín-Rodríguez : Software, Investigation, Funding acquisition Ancor Sanz-García : Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft Hideo Inaba : Academic Editor Christian Napoli : Academic Editor Received 2026 Feb 13; Revised 2026 Mar 27; Accepted 2026 Apr 1; Collection date 2026 Apr. © 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license . PMC Copyright notice PMCID: PMC13073158 PMID: 41975948 Abstract Background/Objectives: Differences between rural and urban settings, as well as between emergency medical service (EMS) systems, may influence short-term mortality among patients attended in the prehospital setting. The aim of this study was to determine the associations of rurality and the US and Spanish EMS health systems with patient mortality. Methods: This was a multicenter, EMS-based, observational study involving a prospective dataset, the Salud de Castilla y Leon dataset (SACYL) from Spain, and a retrospective dataset, the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) from the US. All consecutive EMS activations of adult patients (≥18 years) requiring high-priority transport to emergency departments were included in the analysis. The collected variables included demographic characteristics, EMS transport characteristics, case characteristics, and rural or urban origin. The primary outcome was 2-day, short-term mortality. Results: A total of 54,981 EMS activations were considered from both datasets. The mortality rate was 8.47% for rural areas and 11.8% for urban areas ( p < 0.001). Multivariable analyses showed that mortality patterns differed according to geographic setting and EMS system. Male sex and the use of advanced life support were associated with higher odds of mortality in several models, while prehospital time intervals and call characteristics showed context- and system-dependent associations, including protective effects in specific subgroups. Conclusions: Short-term mortality differed between rural and urban settings, with heterogeneous patterns across EMS systems. These findings highlight the importance of considering both geographic context and system-level organizational characteristics when evaluating prehospital care and mortality outcomes. Keywords: emergency medical services, rurality, urban, prehospital, mortality 1. Introduction Prehospital care is a key pillar of healthcare systems, providing out-of-hospital Emergency Medical Services (EMSs). Its primary objective is to deliver timely and appropriate medical care in acute situations, including patient assessment, initial stabilization, and, when indicated, advanced life support interventions, before and during transport to a medical facility. This early management is critical in life-threatening conditions and can significantly influence patient outcomes. The care includes the initial assessment of the patient, the administration of first aid, and safe and rapid transportation to a hospital [ 1 , 2 ]. However, globally, EMS systems vary significantly depending on the available resources and the organizational structure. Differences in EMS strategic design and infrastructure between regions have been shown to affect response efficiency and equity, underlining the need to optimize services in both urban and rural settings to improve outcomes [ 3 ]. In the United States, the EMS operates in a decentralized manner, resulting in significant differences in organization, funding, and regulation between regions. This system includes various levels of care, ranging from basic life support (BLS) provided by basic responders to advanced life support (ALS) administered by paramedics trained to perform complex medical procedures [ 4 , 5 ]. The EMS is regulated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), although each state is free to develop its own protocols, leading to substantial differences in the quality and scope of services [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. In contrast, the EMS of Castilla y León, SACYL, Spain, features a more centralized structure. SACYL integrates a network of BLS and ALS units, with the involvement of physicians and registered emergency nurses (ERNs), who provide care both on scene and en route to the hospital. This centralized approach allows for greater cohesion in service delivery and a more uniform response to emergencies, regardless of location [ 9 ]. There are also significant disparities between rural and urban areas in terms of access to and quality of prehospital care services. In urban areas, higher population density and proximity to well-equipped medical centers facilitate faster response times [ 10 , 11 ]. However, in rural areas, resource shortages and longer distances can complicate timely and effective care. These factors contribute to notable differences in emergency medical care between rural and urban settings [ 12 , 13 ]. Thus, prehospital care is essential to healthcare systems worldwide, but its structure varies according to geographical and cultural context. Moreover, the comparison between the U.S. and SACYL highlights the diversity of approaches and the need to tailor emergency services to the characteristics of each population [ 14 ]. Therefore, there is a need for studies investigating how differences in the structure and functioning of EMS systems and patients’ living places impact clinical outcomes, particularly in terms of short-term mortality across different environments. The objective of this study was to determine the association of rurality with mortality in patients served by EMSs. Additionally, specific objectives were the following: (i) to explore the characteristics of rural patients by considering the association of variables with rurality for different healthcare systems (the U.S., the SACYL, and both); (ii) to explore the variables associated with mortality in rural patients in different healthcare systems (the U.S., the SACYL, and both); (iii) to explore this association differently in urban patients, again in different healthcare systems (the U.S., the SACYL, and both); and (iv) to explore the interaction between rurality and the health system. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Study Design This was a multicenter, EMS-based, observational study involving a prospective dataset, the Salud de Castilla y Leon (SACYL) dataset, and a retrospective dataset, the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) [ 14 ]. The simultaneous inclusion of two prehospital emergency care databases with distinct organizational and operational structures was intended to assess the generalizability of the association between rurality and mortality across different healthcare systems. For the SACYL dataset, the study was approved by the local institutional research review board of the Public Health Service (reference: PI-049-19 and PI-GR-19-1258), and the research protocol was registered with the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ISRCTN48326533 and ISRCTN49321933). For NEMSIS, the institutional research board granted a waiver/exemption owing to the use of deidentified data. We followed the guidelines of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement ( Supplementary data p3 ). 2.2. Study Settings The SACYL dataset was collected prospectively between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023 in four Spanish provinces (Burgos, Salamanca, Segovia, and Valladolid). The EMS is operated by the public health system and is integrated with the ALS (made up of 2 emergency medical technicians, an emergency registered nurse, and a physician), the Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (made up of an emergency registered nurse and a physician), and the BLS (made up of 2 emergency medical technicians). SACYL data were obtained from the public Emergency Medical Services system operated by the regional health authority (SACYL). Access to the dataset was granted following authorization by the corresponding institutional and ethics committees. The SACYL database is not publicly available, and its use is restricted to approved research projects in accordance with Spanish data protection regulations. The Spanish cohort comprises 11,713 EMS-attended cases collected prospectively in four provinces of the Castilla y León region. Together, these provinces cover a population of 995,137 inhabitants, resulting in an average of approximately 2000 EMS cases per year included in the study. These provinces are representative of a mixed rural–urban population. Valladolid and Burgos include medium-sized urban centers, while Salamanca and Segovia encompass a large proportion of rural and semi-rural areas with low population density. All Emergency Medical Services and receiving hospitals in the study area are fully integrated into the public health system and operate under the exclusive coordination of the regional Emergency Coordination Center (1-1-2). Consequently, the dataset captures all EMS activations within the defined geographic area, minimizing selection bias and enhancing population-level representativeness. NEMSIS included retrospective data between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023, a United States of America dataset of EMS activations populated by more than twelve thousand EMS agencies throughout the United States. The EMS included in the dataset is integrated by ALS (made up of 2 paramedics), Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (made up of an emergency registered nurse and/or a physician), and BLS (made up of 2 emergency medical technicians). NEMSIS is a publicly available national registry, populated by more than 12,000 EMS agencies. De-identified NEMSIS data can be accessed by researchers upon request through the official NEMSIS website, in compliance with its data use agreement and federal privacy regulations. 2.3. Population All consecutive adult EMS activations (≥18 years) evacuated with high priority to emergency departments were included in the analysis. Minors and all cases involving missing data were excluded. 2.4. Outcome The primary outcome was short-term mortality. The SACYL was associated with 2-day mortality (all-cause and in- and out-of-hospital), and for the NEMSIS, short-term mortality was extrapolated from the ED and hospital disposition. The 2-day time frame was selected for two main reasons. First, early deaths are more likely to be directly associated with the clinical condition prompting Emergency Medical Services (EMS) activation and the prehospital care provided. Second, most early warning scores and risk stratification tools used in emergency and prehospital settings are designed to predict early clinical deterioration and short-term mortality rather than long-term outcomes. This outcome definition is consistent with previous studies in the prehospital and emergency medicine literature, which have demonstrated the relevance of early mortality as a clinically meaningful endpoint when evaluating EMS response and early risk prediction strategies [ 15 , 16 ]. Similar methodological approaches have been used in studies examining the relationship between prehospital care and early mortality, as well as the prognostic value of early warning scores and biomarkers in acute conditions [ 17 , 18 ]. Additionally, hospital admission and ICU admission were considered. 2.5. Variable Selection Variables were selected considering their reliable harmonization across the two datasets to ensure methodological consistency and comparability between cohorts. The collected variables were grouped into three domains: (i) demographic variables, including age and sex, which are standard demographic factors consistently reported in both datasets and are well-established predictors of short-term mortality in emergency settings; (ii) EMS operational and transport characteristics, including the level of care provided (BLS or ALS), mission type (alert, on-scene support, or interfacility transfer), and time intervals (response time, on-scene time, transport time, and total EMS time)—these variables being selected due to their documented influence on patient outcomes and their relevance to evaluating system performance in prehospital emergency care; and (iii) case and contextual characteristics, including the chief complaint at the emergency call, suspected prehospital diagnosis, and geographic origin of the incident (urban vs. rural). Geographic classification was included to account for potential differences in EMS response times, access to advanced care, and population density. Because the two datasets use different geographic classification schemes, a harmonization process was applied. The SACYL database categorizes incident location exclusively as urban or rural. In contrast, the NEMSIS database includes four categories: urban, suburban, rural, and wilderness. To ensure comparability between datasets, suburban incidents in NEMSIS were grouped with urban areas, and wilderness incidents were grouped with rural areas, based on similarities in population density, infrastructure, and expected EMS response characteristics. This recoding approach has been used in prior cross-registry analyses and was chosen to minimize misclassification while preserving contextual relevance. The level of care reflects the expected clinical severity at dispatch. All cases included in the present analysis were patients who were evaluated on scene by an ALS team and subsequently transported to the emergency department, either by ALS or BLS units. Therefore, ALS involvement in this study indicates that the patient was considered to have sufficient potential severity to warrant advanced clinical evaluation. 2.6. Data Analysis Descriptive results and the associations between the outcomes and the analyzed variables were assessed by a t -test, the Mann–Whitney U test, or the chi-square test, when appropriate. Absolute values and percentages were used for categorical variables, and median interquartile ranges (IQRs) were used for continuous variables because they did not follow a normal distribution. To determine the variables associated with mortality, a multivariate logistic regression was used. This process was also repeated but with a separate analysis of rural and urban patients. These results were represented via the multivariate logistic regression-derived odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. All calculations and analyses were performed by using our own codes, R packages, and base functions in R, version 4.2.2 ( http://www.R-project.org accessed on 1 July 2025; the R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). 3. Results A total of 11,713 EMS activations were considered from the SACYL dataset, and 43,268 were considered from the NEMSIS dataset ( Figure 1 ). Descriptive tables of all cohorts combined ( Table 1 ) and separately for the NEMSIS and SACYL ( Supplementary Tables S1 and S2 , respectively) revealed that the number of rural patients attended by the EMS was lower than the number of urban patients in both health systems (7069 patients (16.3%) for the NEMSIS and 2314 patients (19.8%) for the SACYL). Globally, the mortality rate according to living location was 795 (8.47%) for rural areas and 5358 (11.8%) for urban areas ( p < 0.001). When considering mortality in each database, the NEMSIS presented a mortality rate of 528 (7.47%) for rural areas and 4196 (11.6%) for urban areas ( p < 0.001). The SACYL, however, was not significantly different ( p = 0.183). Age was significantly different between the rural and urban cohorts in both the databases and the global cohort; however, the global and NEMSIS results revealed that older rural patients were aged 62.00 and 61.7 years (for the global cohort and the NEMSIS cohort, respectively) vs. 61.4 and 60.4 years for the urban cohort (both p < 0.001). The SACYL database presented older urban patients: 65.4 vs. 62.8 for rural ( p < 0.001). Regarding sex, no statistically significant differences were found for the global and NEMSIS databases. For the SACYL database, there were more males (1434, 62%) in rural areas than in urban areas (5403, 57.5%, p < 0.001). This difference between the NEMSIS and SACYL was also observed in terms of the level of care of the EMS units, specifically whether the unit was an ALS or a BLS. The NEMSIS presented a higher percentage of advanced life support for urban areas (33,015 (91.2%) vs. 5323 (75.3%) for rural areas), whereas for the SACYL, the opposite was observed: 1634 (70.6%) for rural areas and 5708 (60.7%) for urban areas (both p < 0.001). With respect to the complaints reported by dispatch, the NEMSIS presented differences between rural and urban areas for disease, social demand, and other causes, and the SACYL presented differences for labor accidents, social demand, and traffic. The rural or urban differences in the main organ or system affected showed that the NEMSIS database presented differences for cardiovascular, endocrine and metabolic, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, global/general, musculoskeletal/skin/trauma, neurologic, and pulmonary factors; the SACYL database presented differences only for musculoskeletal/skin/trauma and pulmonary factors. Finally, both cohorts presented greater numbers of alerts, transfers, and the totals for the rural patients than for urban patients ( p < 0.001). Figure 1. Open in a new tab Flowchart. Table 1. Patient characteristics according to living place (rural or urban). Rural Urban Odds Ratio [95%CI] p -Value N = 9383 N = 45,598 Age 62.0 (19.6) 61.4 (19.6) 1.00 [1.00; 1.00] 0.010 Sex: Female 3889 (41.4%) 19,210 (42.1%) Ref. Ref. Male 5494 (58.6%) 26,388 (57.9%) 0.97 [0.93; 1.02] 0.223 Level of care of the EMS unit: Basic life support 2426 (25.9%) 6875 (15.1%) Ref. Ref. Advanced life support 6957 (74.1%) 38,723 (84.9%) 1.96 [1.86; 2.07] <0.001 Complaint reported by dispatch: Causal accident 1374 (14.6%) 6066 (13.3%) Ref. Ref. Disease 4824 (51.4%) 27,186 (59.6%) 1.28 [1.19; 1.36] <0.001 Laboral accident 62 (0.66%) 138 (0.30%) 0.50 [0.37; 0.69] <0.001 Others 1607 (17.1%) 4249 (9.32%) 0.60 [0.55; 0.65] <0.001 Social demand 896 (9.55%) 5585 (12.2%) 1.41 [1.29; 1.55] <0.001 Traffic 620 (6.61%) 2374 (5.21%) 0.87 [0.78; 0.96] 0.009 Chief complaint organ system: Cardiovascular 2484 (26.5%) 11,824 (25.9%) Ref. Ref. Endocrine metabolic 209 (2.23%) 773 (1.70%) 0.78 [0.66; 0.91] 0.002 Gastrointestinal 338 (3.60%) 1189 (2.61%) 0.74 [0.65; 0.84] <0.001 Genitourinary 92 (0.98%) 281 (0.62%) 0.64 [0.51; 0.82] <0.001 Global general 2078 (22.1%) 14,182 (31.1%) 1.43 [1.35; 1.53] <0.001 Lymphatic/immune 165 (1.76%) 823 (1.80%) 1.05 [0.88; 1.25] 0.610 Musculoskeletal/skin/trauma 1415 (15.1%) 3967 (8.70%) 0.59 [0.55; 0.63] <0.001 Neurologic 1595 (17.0%) 8513 (18.7%) 1.12 [1.05; 1.20] 0.001 Pulmonary 1007 (10.7%) 4046 (8.87%) 0.84 [0.78; 0.92] <0.001 Hospital admission: No 6943 (74.0%) 20,475 (44.9%) Ref. Ref. Yes 2440 (26.0%) 25,123 (55.1%) 3.49 [3.32; 3.67] <0.001 ICU admission: No 8073 (86.0%) 41,628 (91.3%) Ref. Ref. Yes 1310 (14.0%) 3970 (8.71%) 0.59 [0.55; 0.63] <0.001 Hospital mortality: No 8612 (91.8%) 40,525 (88.9%) Ref. Ref. Yes 771 (8.22%) 5073 (11.1%) 1.40 [1.29; 1.51] <0.001 Total mortality: No 8588 (91.5%) 40,240 (88.2%) Ref. Ref. Yes 795 (8.47%) 5358 (11.8%) 1.44 [1.33; 1.56] <0.001 Alert time 18.0 (20.9) 12.4 (25.4) 0.99 [0.99; 0.99] <0.001 Support time 24.2 (20.6) 23.9 (16.7) 1.00 [1.00; 1.00] 0.065 Transfer time 24.6 (27.4) 15.6 (16.5) 0.98 [0.98; 0.98] <0.001 Total time 66.9 (48.9) 51.8 (42.0) 0.99 [0.99; 0.99] <0.001 Year: 2018 1198 (12.8%) 2697 (5.91%) Ref. Ref. 2019 1392 (14.8%) 4627 (10.1%) 1.48 [1.35; 1.62] <0.001 2020 1490 (15.9%) 6409 (14.1%) 1.91 [1.75; 2.09] <0.001 2021 1884 (20.1%) 8710 (19.1%) 2.05 [1.89; 2.23] <0.001 2022 1888 (20.1%) 9997 (21.9%) 2.35 [2.16; 2.56] <0.001 2023 1531 (16.3%) 13,158 (28.9%) 3.82 [3.50; 4.16] <0.001 Cohort: NEMSIS 7069 (75.3%) 36,199 (79.4%) Ref. Ref. SACYL 2314 (24.7%) 9399 (20.6%) 0.79 [0.75; 0.84] <0.001 Open in a new tab Comparisons between cohorts and groups resulting from the combination of cohorts and rural and urban areas can be found in Supplementary Tables S3 and S4 . 3.1. Multivariate Logistic Regression for Mortality in the Rural Subset The analyses of factors associated with mortality in rural patients are shown in Figure 2 . In the pooled multivariate model including both cohorts ( Figure 2 a), male sex (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.02–1.39) and the use of advanced life support (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.13–1.63) were associated with higher odds of mortality, whereas longer transfer time (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.98–0.99) and several complaint categories and organ-system groups were associated with lower odds of mortality. Figure 2. Open in a new tab Adjusted odds ratios for mortality in rural patients. ( a ) Both cohorts, ( b ) NEMSIS, ( c ) SACYL. In the NEMSIS rural cohort ( Figure 2 b), male sex (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.06–1.55), traffic-related complaints (OR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.03–2.42), and endocrine–metabolic conditions (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.00–2.16) were associated with higher odds of mortality, while longer transfer time (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.98–0.99), social demand, and several organ-system categories were associated with lower odds of mortality. In the SACYL rural cohort ( Figure 2 c), the use of advanced life support (OR: 3.98; 95% CI: 2.69–6.04), longer support time (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02–1.05), longer transfer time (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01–1.04), and multiple organ-system categories were associated with higher odds of mortality, whereas longer total prehospital time was associated with lower odds of mortality (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96–0.99). 3.2. Multivariate Logistic Regression for Mortality in the Urban Subset The analyses of factors associated with mortality in urban patients are shown in Figure 3 . In the pooled multivariate model including both cohorts ( Figure 3 a), male sex (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.15–1.29), the use of advanced life support (OR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.33–1.59), and longer support time (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01–1.02) were associated with higher odds of mortality. In addition, the years 2022 (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.07–1.40) and 2023 (OR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.36–1.77) were associated with higher odds of mortality. Figure 3. Open in a new tab Adjusted odds ratios for mortality in urban patients. ( a ) Both cohorts, ( b ) NEMSIS, ( c ) SACYL. Conversely, social demand (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.33–0.45), traffic-related calls (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.33–0.44), and multiple organ system categories, including endocrine–metabolic, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, global/general, musculoskeletal/skin/trauma, neurologic, and pulmonary, were associated with lower odds of mortality. Additionally, longer alert time (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.98–0.99), longer transfer time (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.98–0.99), and the years 2019, 2020, and 2021 were associated with lower odds of mortality. In the urban NEMSIS cohort ( Figure 3 b), age (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01–1.02) and male sex (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.10–1.27) were associated with higher odds of mortality. Moreover, disease-related calls (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.02–1.28), traffic-related calls (OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.34–1.94), and the years 2022 (OR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.14–1.59) and 2023 (OR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.19–1.65) were associated with higher odds of mortality. By contrast, the use of advanced life support was associated with lower odds of mortality (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.60–0.74), as were social demand and most organ system categories. In addition, longer alert time, longer transfer time, and the years 2019 and 2020 were associated with lower odds of mortality. In the urban SACYL cohort ( Figure 3 c), male sex (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.06–1.43), the use of advanced life support (OR: 3.76; 95% CI: 3.15–4.49), longer support time (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.03–1.05), and longer transfer time (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.02–1.04) were associated with higher odds of mortality. Regarding call reasons, disease-related calls (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.33–0.78), social demand (OR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.45–1.32), and traffic-related calls (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.21–0.68) were associated with lower odds of mortality. With respect to organ system categories, endocrine–metabolic, global/general, lymphatic/immune, neurologic, and pulmonary conditions were associated with higher odds of mortality. Finally, the years 2021 (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.53–0.89) and 2022 (OR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.58–0.98) were associated with lower odds of mortality. The univariate analyses from which the previous results were derived can be found in Supplementary Tables S5–S10 for both cohorts of rural patients, NEMSIS rural patients, SACYL rural patients, both cohorts of urban patients, NEMSIS urban patients, and SACYL urban patients, respectively. 3.3. Multivariate Logistic Regression for Mortality Considering Both Rural and Urban Datasets The previous analyses were also adjusted by using multivariate logistic regression for both datasets (rural and urban) together ( Figure 4 ). The variables associated with mortality were sex, use of advanced life support, complaint reported by dispatch, chief complaint organ system, alert, transfer, total time, and year (2019 to 2023) (all p < 0.05). Figure 4. Open in a new tab Adjusted odds ratios for both rural and urban datasets for mortality. 3.4. Multivariate Logistic Regression Using a Four-Level Setting Variable In the logistic regression model using a combined four-level setting variable, with NEMSIS rural as the reference category ( Figure 5 ), significant differences in the odds of the outcome were observed across groups. Compared with NEMSIS rural patients, those in NEMSIS urban areas had higher odds of the outcome (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.27–1.54; p < 0.001). Similarly, patients in SACYL rural settings showed increased odds (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.02–1.43; p = 0.028), but the same was not true for SACYL urban settings (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.63–0.81; p < 0.001). Figure 5. Open in a new tab Adjusted odds ratios including the interaction term between rurality and the health system for mortality for both datasets. In inverse probability weighting (IPW) analyses performed for the NEMSIS cohort, the association between urban versus rural setting and mortality remained statistically significant and was greater in magnitude than in the conventional multivariable model. After weighting, urban patients had significantly higher odds of mortality compared with rural patients (OR: 3.07, 95% CI: 2.84–3.31; p < 0.001). In the SACYL cohort, IPW with Firth logistic regression was applied to account for potential confounding and extreme weights. Urban patients had significantly lower odds of mortality than rural patients (OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.81–0.91, p < 0.001), consistent with results from conventional multivariable logistic regression. 4. Discussion In this multicenter observational study, short-term mortality outcomes in patients attended by EMS were analyzed using two large prehospital databases corresponding to healthcare systems with distinct organizational structures: SACYL (Spain) and NEMSIS (United States). The pooled analysis showed higher mortality in urban areas compared with rural areas, despite systematically longer operational times in rural settings. However, this overall pattern was not homogeneous across systems, highlighting the importance of considering organizational and care-related context when interpreting rural–urban differences in prehospital mortality. When each database was analyzed separately, no statistically significant differences in mortality between rural and urban areas were observed in the SACYL system, whereas in NEMSIS, mortality was consistently higher in urban areas. These findings are consistent with previous studies evaluating EMS effectiveness in different contexts, which have reported that mortality may not differ between rural and urban settings after adjustment for structural and care-related factors, even when differences in response times and resources exist [ 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Beyond clinical outcomes, European evidence also points to rural–urban differences in the utilization of emergency services, including differential use of aeromedical transport, as well as community-level variations (e.g., first aid knowledge), which may influence prognosis before EMS arrival [ 22 , 23 ]. The centralized structure of the SACYL system may help explain the absence of mortality differences between rural and urban areas, as greater organizational and protocol homogeneity can mitigate care-related variability across territories [ 20 , 21 ]. In contrast, the NEMSIS analysis suggests that although transport times are longer in rural areas, mortality may be higher in urban areas due to service saturation and high population density [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. From an operational perspective, rural patients experienced longer alert times, transport times, and total prehospital care times. This pattern is consistent with previous literature describing greater distances and geographic barriers in rural settings, which are associated with longer transport and total prehospital times [ 27 ]. However, in multivariable models, time intervals did not show a uniform association with increased mortality risk. In fact, some time variables (e.g., transport time) were associated with lower odds of mortality in specific subgroups, particularly in the pooled rural analysis and in NEMSIS. This finding suggests that “prehospital time” may act as a composite marker, reflecting not only distance but also operational decisions (resource allocation, on-scene stabilization, hospital destination selection) and care coordination. Therefore, its interpretation should be contextualized within the organizational structure of the system and the nature of the cases. One of the most relevant findings of this study is the differential role of ALS in mortality. In SACYL, ALS was associated with higher odds of mortality in both rural and urban areas. Importantly, this association should be interpreted as a marker of greater baseline severity and clinical complexity rather than as a harmful effect of advanced prehospital care itself. These findings are consistent with previous studies documenting the negative impact of prolonged prehospital times on mortality [ 28 , 29 ]. In contrast, in the urban NEMSIS setting, ALS was associated with lower odds of mortality, which may reflect differences in activation criteria, clinical profiles attended by each level of care, and/or integration of ALS within the care continuum. These inter-system discrepancies reinforce the need to interpret ALS effects within the specific organizational framework of each EMS. Male sex was consistently associated with higher mortality across several models in both rural and urban areas. Although causality cannot be established, this association may reflect differences in clinical profiles, baseline severity, or patterns of resource utilization and is consistent with previous literature highlighting the relevance of demographic characteristics in prognosis in emergency care settings [ 30 , 31 ]. Regarding call reasons, social-demand calls were consistently associated with lower odds of mortality, particularly in urban models, suggesting that these activations often correspond to low-acuity situations rather than potentially life-threatening conditions. Recent studies have also emphasized the role of contextual and organizational factors in shaping outcomes in emergency care across rural and urban environments [ 32 , 33 ]. In contrast, traffic-related calls showed a system- and context-dependent association with mortality: while they were associated with lower odds of mortality in the pooled urban model and in urban SACYL, they were associated with higher mortality risk in NEMSIS, both in rural and urban areas, likely reflecting greater injury severity and trauma burden in these scenarios. These findings underscore the need to interpret call reasons within the specific organizational and epidemiological framework of each EMS. Analysis by affected organ or system revealed distinct patterns between NEMSIS and SACYL. In NEMSIS, mortality varied markedly according to the primary affected organ or system, potentially reflecting differences in access to specialized resources, care pathways, or disease burden depending on rural or urban context. In SACYL, although associations between organ system and mortality were less consistent across models, several categories were associated with higher mortality risk in both rural and urban areas, suggesting that the affected organ system remains a relevant prognostic determinant even within a more standardized organizational environment. Overall, these findings indicate that observed differences may be driven more by structural characteristics of the system than by rurality considered in isolation, highlighting the importance of interpreting the rural–urban dichotomy within the EMS framework [ 20 , 24 , 34 ]. Finally, the increase in mortality observed in 2022 and 2023 in NEMSIS may reflect indirect and persistent effects related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including delays in seeking care, accumulation of unmet healthcare needs, and sustained system pressure. Previous evidence suggests that unmet medical needs during the first wave of the pandemic were associated with adverse outcomes at later stages, which may help explain these temporal trends [ 33 ]. These findings highlight the complexity of factors influencing mortality in urban areas, where service saturation and population density may amplify the consequences of diagnostic and therapeutic delays. Overall, these data emphasize the need for a multidimensional approach when designing prehospital strategies, considering both risk and protective factors and adapting interventions to the specific needs of each population. Although causality cannot be established, these results underscore the importance of considering delayed and indirect pandemic-related effects when interpreting recent trends in prehospital mortality. Among the main strengths of this study is its generalizability, derived from the use of two large cohorts from EMS systems with clearly distinct organizational structures and an extended study period. The comparison between SACYL and NEMSIS provides valuable insight into how organizational and contextual factors may influence outcomes beyond the simple rural–urban dichotomy. Nevertheless, this study has limitations. First, the study period includes the COVID-19 pandemic years, which may have influenced EMS demand and performance. In addition, the variables included were limited to those that could be harmonized across databases, requiring simplification of categories (rurality, call reason, and organ system), which may affect comparative precision. Second, although the inclusion of two EMS systems is a strength, structural and operational differences between them require cautious interpretation of the findings and limit direct extrapolation to other healthcare contexts. Third, the absence of validated severity scores or comprehensive comorbidity data represents a potential source of residual confounding. However, by including level of care and chief complaint as proxies for acuity, we have attempted to mitigate this limitation to the extent possible, given the database constraints. Finally, due to the dual origin of the data, it was not possible to obtain relevant confounders such as comorbidities, healthcare access, or socioeconomic status, which are known to significantly affect outcomes. Future research should incorporate direct severity measures and more detailed clinical and socioeconomic data. 5. Conclusions In conclusion, this study demonstrates that short-term mortality differs between rural and urban settings, with higher mortality observed in urban areas despite longer prehospital times in rural zones. Male sex, the use of advanced life support, and selected prehospital time intervals were identified as relevant factors associated with mortality, particularly in urban environments. These findings highlight the relevance of geographic context when evaluating prehospital outcomes while also suggesting that system-level organizational characteristics may modulate the magnitude and direction of rural–urban differences. Overall, the results underscore the importance of adapting prehospital care strategies to the specific demands and organizational structures of rural and urban EMS systems in order to optimize emergency care delivery and improve patient outcomes. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the Emergency Medical Services and the Public Health Service of Castilla y León (SACYL), as well as the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS), for providing access to the datasets and for their technical support during data management. The authors also acknowledge the administrative staff of the participating institutions for their assistance throughout the development of this study. Abbreviations The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript: ALS Advanced Life Support BLS Basic Life Support CI Confidence Interval COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 ED Emergency Department EMS Emergency Medical Services ERN Emergency Registered Nurse ICU Intensive Care Unit IQR Interquartile Range ISRCTN International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number NEMSIS National Emergency Medical Services Information System NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration OR Odds Ratio PI Project Identifier (Ethics Approval Code) R Statistical Software R (version 4.2.2) SACYL Salud de Castilla y León STROBE Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology USA United States of America WHO World Health Organization Open in a new tab Supplementary Materials The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/healthcare14070946/s1 . Table S1. Patients’ characteristics according to living place (rural or urban) for the NEMSIS database. Table S2. Patients’ characteristics according to living place (rural or urban) for the SACYL database. Table S3. Patients’ characteristics according to cohort (NEMSIS vs. SACYL). Table S4. Comparison between the groups resulting from the combination of cohorts and rural and urban areas. Table S5. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for both cohorts of rural patients. Table S6. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for NEMSIS rural patients. Table S7. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for SACYL rural patients. Table S8. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for both cohorts of urban patients. Table S9. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for NEMSIS urban patients. Table S10. Patients’ characteristics according to mortality for SACYL urban patients [ 35 ]. healthcare-14-00946-s001.zip (429.1KB, zip) Author Contributions Conceptualization, F.M.-R. and A.S.-G.; methodology, J.L.M.-C.; software, A.S.-G.; validation, C.R.-P., J.J.B.-J. and J.F.D.B.; formal analysis, F.M.-R.; investigation, A.S.-G.; resources, C.R.-P.; data curation, B.P.-L., C.R.-P., P.Á.B., J.G.-C. and M.C.-J.; writing—original draft preparation, Á.A.-P.; writing—review and editing, C.R.-P.; visualization, Á.A.-P.; supervision, A.S.-G.; project administration, Á.A.-P.; funding acquisition, F.M.-R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Institutional Review Board Statement Under Spanish data protection law (Ley Orgánica 3/2018, of 5 December, on Personal Data Protection and Guarantee of Digital Rights) as implemented from the EU General Data Protection Regulation (Reglamento General de Protección de Datos, GDPR), data that have been rendered truly anonymized (as the one from NEMSIS public database) are no longer classed as personal data subject to GDPR protections. Therefore, research that uses fully deidentified data that cannot be linked to identifiable individuals does not require the same consent or ethics review requirements that apply to identifiable personal data. Informed Consent Statement Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study in the SACYL dataset, and for NEMSIS, the institutional research granted a waiver/exemption owing to the use of deidentified data. Data Availability Statement The data used in this study are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions. De-identified data from the SACYL and NEMSIS datasets may be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and subject to approval by the relevant data custodians and ethics committees. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Funding Statement This work was supported by the Institute of Health Carlos III (Spain) and co-financed by the European Union [grant numbers DTS23/00010] for FM-R. Footnotes Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. References 1. American College of Emergency Physicians A Culture of Safety in EMS Systems. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2021;78:e37–e57. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2021.05.020. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 2. Bhattarai H.K., Bhusal S., Barone-Adesi F., Hubloue I. Prehospital emergency care in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Prehospital Disaster Med. 2023;38:495–512. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X23006088. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 3. Neira-Rodado D., Paz-Roa J.C., Escobar J.W. Emergency medical services strategic design: A comprehensive multiobjective approach to ensure system sustainability and quality. Smart Cities. 2025;8:52. doi: 10.3390/smartcities8020052. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ] 4. American Ambulance Association . Levels of EMS Certification in the United States. American Ambulance Association; Washington, DC, USA: 2021. [ Google Scholar ] 5. Jenkins J.L., Hsu E.B., Russell A., Zhang A., Wilson L.M., Bass E.B. Infection Prevention and Control for the Emergency Medical Services and 911 Workforce. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); Rockville, MD, USA: 2022. Report No.: 22(23)-EHC039. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 6. Goldberg S.A., Chadwick E., Makam S., Shah H.J., Bass M.B., Hasdianda M.A., Peters G., Camargo C.A., Jr., Cash R.E. Twenty years after the EMS Research Agenda: Trends in emergency medical services publications and research funding. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2023;82:94–100. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2023.02.017. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 7. Rief M., Auinger D., Eichinger M., Honnef G., Schittek G.A., Metnitz P., Prause G., Zoidl P., Zajic P. Physician utilization in prehospital emergency medical services in Europe: An overview and comparison. Emergencias. 2023;35:125–135. doi: 10.55633/s3me/E080.2023. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 8. Cattermole G.N., Kumar V.A., Walravens S., European Society for Emergency Medicine Working Group on Quality and Safety in Emergency Medicine (EWQSEM). Global emergency care: A quality and safety perspective. Eur. J. Emerg. Med. 2023;30:389–390. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001082. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 9. Servicio de Salud de Castilla y León (SACYL) Sistema de Emergencias Sanitarias. SACYL; Valladolid, Spain: 2022. [ Google Scholar ] 10. Alhazmi R.A., Parker R.D., Wen S. Standard precautions among emergency medical services in urban and rural areas. Workplace Health Saf. 2020;68:73–80. doi: 10.1177/2165079919864118. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 11. Hegenberg K., Trentzsch H., Gross S., Prückner S. Use of pre-hospital emergency medical services in urban and rural municipalities over a 10 year period: An observational study based on routinely collected dispatch data. Scand. J. Trauma Resusc. Emerg. Med. 2019;27:35. doi: 10.1186/s13049-019-0607-5. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 12. Ma C., Devoti A., O’Connor M. Rural and urban disparities in quality of home health care: A longitudinal cohort study (2014–2018) J. Rural. Health. 2022;38:705–712. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12642. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 13. Loomer L., Rahman M., Mroz T.M., Gozalo P.L., Mor V. Impact of higher payments for rural home health episodes on rehospitalizations. J. Rural. Health. 2023;39:604–610. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12725. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 14. National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) NEMSIS Data Cube. 2024. [(accessed on 1 July 2025)]. Available online: https://nemsis.org/view-reports/public-reports/ems-data-cube/ 15. Galvagno S.M., Sikorski R.A., Floccare D.J., Rock P., Mazzeffi M.A., DuBose J.J., Scalea T.M., Miller C., Richards J.E., O’cOnnor J.V., et al. Prehospital Point of Care Testing for the Early Detection of Shock and Prediction of Lifesaving Interventions. Shock. 2020;54:710–716. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001567. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 16. Swan K.L., Avard B.J., Keene T. The relationship between elevated prehospital point-of-care lactate measurements, intensive care unit admission, and mortality: A retrospective review of adult patients. Aust. Crit. Care. 2019;32:100–105. doi: 10.1016/j.aucc.2018.02.006. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 17. Mills E.H.A., Aasbjerg K., Hansen S.M., Ringgren K.B., Dahl M., Rasmussen B.S., Torp-Pedersen C., Søgaard P., Kragholm K. Prehospital time and mortality in patients requiring a highest priority emergency medical response: A Danish registry-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e023049. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023049. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 18. Hargreaves D.S., de Carvalho J.L.J., Smith L., Picton G., Venn R., Hodgson L.E. Persistently elevated early warning scores and lactate identifies patients at high risk of mortality in suspected sepsis. Eur. J. Emerg. Med. 2020;27:125–131. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000630. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 19. Masuda J., Kishi M., Kumagai N., Yamazaki T., Sakata K., Higuma T., Ogimoto A., Dohi K., Tanigawa T., Hanada H., et al. Rural–urban disparity in emergency care for acute myocardial infarction in Japan. Circ. J. 2018;82:1666–1674. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-17-1275. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 20. Cimino J., Braun C. Clinical research in prehospital care: Current and future challenges. Clin. Pract. 2023;13:1266–1285. doi: 10.3390/clinpract13050114. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 21. Matsuzawa Y., Kosuge M., Fukui K., Suzuki H., Kimura K. Present and future status of cardiovascular emergency care system in urban areas of Japan—Importance of prehospital 12-lead electrocardiogram—. Circ. J. 2022;86:591–599. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-21-0807. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 22. Świeżewski S.P., Wejnarski A., Leszczyński P.K., Wojak A., Fronczak A., Darocha T., Gałązkowski R., Opolski G., Rzońca P. Characteristics of urban versus rural utilization of the Polish helicopter emergency medical service in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Kardiol. Pol. 2020;78:284–291. doi: 10.33963/KP.15190. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 23. Jastrzębska A., Gałczyński K. Comparison of the level of knowledge in the field of first aid among residents of urban and rural areas. Crit. Care Innov. 2019;2:11–16. doi: 10.32114/CCI.2019.2.4.11.16. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ] 24. Jin Y., Maimaitiming M., Li J., Hoving D.J., Yuan B. Coordination of care to improve outcomes of emergency medical services. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2023;2023:CD015316. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015316. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ] 25. Kane A., Tackett S., Ngo T., Burkett G.S., Wilson M.E., Ryan L.M., Klein B.L. Impact of an emergency department saturation tool on a pediatric hospital’s capacity management policy. Pediatr. Emerg. Care. 2023;39:457–461. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000002964. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 26. Weiss S.J., Ernst A.A., Nick T.G. Comparison of the National Emergency Department Overcrowding Scale and the Emergency Department Work Index for quantifying emergency department crowding. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2006;13:513–518. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.12.009. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 27. Rey-Beiro S., Martínez-Roget F. Rural–urban differences in older adults’ life satisfaction and its determining factors. Heliyon. 2024;10:e30842. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30842. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 28. Martín-Rodríguez F., Sanz-García A., Ortega Moreno L., Del Pozo Vegas C., Castro-Villamor M.A., Martín-Conty J.L., López-Izquierdo R., Ortega Rabbione G. Risk for early death in acutely ill older adults attended by prehospital emergency medical services. Emergencias. 2020;32:177–184. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 29. Brown J.B., Rosengart M.R., Forsythe R.M., Reynolds B.R., Gestring M.L., Hallinan W.M., Peitzman A.B., Billiar T.R., Sperry J.L. Not all prehospital time is equal: Influence of scene time on mortality. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;81:93–100. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000999. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 30. Chen K.C., Hsu J.Z., Wen S.H. Sex differences in clinical characteristics, timeliness of care, and in-hospital outcomes of adult non-trauma patients in the emergency department. PLoS ONE. 2025;20:e0332468. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0332468. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 31. Candel B.G., Dap S., Raven W., Lameijer H., Gaakeer M.I., de Jonge E., de Groot B. Sex differences in clinical presentation and risk stratification in the emergency department: An observational multicenter cohort study. Eur. J. Intern. Med. 2022;95:74–79. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2021.09.001. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 32. Hernandez N., Zagales R., Awan M.U., Kumar S., Cruz F., Evans K., Heller K., Zito T., Elkbuli A. Factors contributing to disparities in trauma care between urban vs rural trauma centers: Towards improving trauma care access and quality of care delivery. Injury. 2024;55:112017. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2024.112017. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 33. Chen X., Orom H., Hay J.L., Waters E.A., Schofield E., Li Y., Kiviniemi M.T. Differences in rural and urban health information access and use. J. Rural. Health. 2019;35:405–417. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12335. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 34. Bergeot J., Jusot F. How did unmet care needs during the pandemic affect health outcomes of older European individuals? Econ. Hum. Biol. 2024;52:101317. doi: 10.1016/j.ehb.2023.101317. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 35. Vandenbroucke J.P., von Elm E., Altman D.G., Gøtzsche P.C., Mulrow C.D., Pocock S.J., Poole C., Schlesselman J.J., Egger M. STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Associated Data This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. Supplementary Materials healthcare-14-00946-s001.zip (429.1KB, zip) Data Availability Statement The data used in this study are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions. De-identified data from the SACYL and NEMSIS datasets may be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and subject to approval by the relevant data custodians and ethics committees. Articles from Healthcare are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) ACTIONS View on publisher site PDF (2.1 MB) Cite Collections Permalink PERMALINK Copy RESOURCES Similar articles Cited by other articles Links to NCBI Databases Cite Copy Download .nbib .nbib Format: AMA APA MLA NLM Add to Collections Create a new collection Add to an existing collection Name your collection * Choose a collection Unable to load your collection due to an error Please try again Add Cancel Follow NCBI NCBI on X (formerly known as Twitter) NCBI on Facebook NCBI on LinkedIn NCBI on GitHub NCBI RSS feed Connect with NLM NLM on X (formerly known as Twitter) NLM on Facebook NLM on YouTube National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894 Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Help Accessibility Careers NLM NIH HHS USA.gov Back to Top