International Association for Trauma Surgery and Intensive Care (IATSIC): a historical vignette.

IATSIC was conceived in the mid-1980s by Martin Allgöwer. Its goal was to provide an international forum and to disseminate knowledge of trauma care globally. It has met and continues to meet this goal. IATSIC provides a forum for scholarly exchange and thus for elevating the global discussion of trauma. The organization propagates standards of care and provides courses for training surgeons and other healthcare professionals. Further, IATSIC continues to provide a solid foundation for quality practice and management of trauma by emphasizing not only the need to prioritize care of the injured worldwide, but also the knowledge, skills, tactics, and techniques needed to provide the care in a wide variety of environments around the globe. With the other specialty societies (IAES, IASMEN, ISDS, and BSI), it provides a substantial and sustaining underpinning for the ongoing activities of ISS/SIC. Martin Allgöwer died on October 27, 2007, but his vision lives on (Fig. 6).

Combat injury profiles among U.S. military personnel who survived serious wounds in Iraq and Afghanistan: A latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan had the most casualties since Vietnam with more than 53,000 wounded in action. Novel injury mechanisms, such as improvised explosive devices, and higher rates of survivability compared with previous wars led to a new pattern of combat injuries. The purpose of the present study was to use latent class analysis (LCA) to identify combat injury profiles among U.S. military personnel who survived serious wounds. METHODS: A total of 5,227 combat casualty events with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 9 or greater that occurred in Iraq and Afghanistan from December 2002 to July 2019 were identified from the Expeditionary Medical Encounter Database for analysis. The Barell Injury Diagnosis Matrix was used to classify injuries into binary variables by site and type of injury. LCA was employed to identify injury profiles that accounted for co-occurring injuries. Injury profiles were described and compared by demographic, operational, and injury-specific variables. RESULTS: Seven injury profiles were identified and defined as: (1) open wounds (18.8%), (2) Type 1 traumatic brain injury (TBI)/facial injuries (14.2%), (3) disseminated injuries (6.8%), (4) Type 2 TBI (15.4%), (5) lower extremity injuries (19.8%), (6) burns (7.4%), and (7) chest and/or abdominal injuries (17.7%). Profiles differed by service branch, combat location, year of injury, injury mechanism, combat posture at the time of injury, and ISS. CONCLUSION: LCA identified seven distinct and interpretable injury profiles among U.S. military personnel who survived serious combat injuries in Iraq or Afghanistan. These findings may be of interest to military medical planners as resource needs are evaluated and projected for future conflicts, and medical professionals involved in the rehabilitation of wounded service members.

Recombinant activated factor VII safety in trauma patients: results from the CONTROL trial.

BACKGROUND: Safety data on recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa, NovoSeven; Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsværd, Denmark) in actively hemorrhaging trauma patients are limited. We present detailed safety data from a large multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study (the CONTROL trial). METHODS: Data from 560 patients were analyzed. Subjects were monitored for adverse events (AEs) after rFVIIa or placebo administration. Incidences, timing, and presence of risk factors were reported by site investigators, supported by external study monitors and overseen by an independent Data Monitoring Committee. RESULTS: There were no differences in overall mortality, organ system failure, or AEs, serious AEs, or medical events of special interest. Arterial and venous thromboembolic (TE) events and their risk factors were similar in both groups. The greatest risk factor for TE events was a chest injury requiring mechanical ventilation >3 days (86%). There were four site investigator-reported myocardial infarctions in the rFVIIa group of which only one met diagnostic criteria preestablished by the Data Monitoring Committee. There were no reported myocardial infarctions in the placebo group. Troponins were increased in 30% of all patients. The rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome was lower in the rFVIIa (3.0%) than in the placebo (7.2%) group (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: This represents the largest placebo-controlled dataset of rFVIIa use in trauma patients to date. In this prospective study of critically bleeding trauma patients, rFVIIa use was associated with an imbalance of investigator-reported Acute myocardial infarction/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (AMI/NSTEMI), but was not associated with an increased risk for other AEs, including TE complications.

Improved characterization of combat injury.

BACKGROUND: Combat injury patterns differ from civilian trauma in that the former are largely explosion-related, comprising multiple mechanistic and fragment injuries and high-kinetic-energy bullets. Further, unlike civilians, U.S. armed forces combatants are usually heavily protected with helmets and Kevlar body armor with ceramic plate inserts. Searchable databases providing actionable, statistically valid knowledge of body surface entry wounds and resulting organ injury severity are essential to understanding combat trauma. METHODS: Two tools were developed to address these unique aspects of combat injury: (1) the Surface Wound Mapping (SWM) database and Surface Wound Analysis Tool (SWAT) software that were developed to generate 3D density maps of point-of-surface wound entry and resultant anatomic injury severity; and (2) the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2005-Military that was developed by a panel of military trauma surgeons to account for multiple injury etiology from explosions and other high-kinetic- energy weapons. Combined data from the Joint Theater Trauma Registry, Navy/Marine Combat Trauma Registry, and the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System Mortality Trauma Registry were coded in AIS 2005-Military, entered into the SWM database, and analyzed for entrance site and wounding path. RESULTS: When data on 1,151 patients, who had a total of 3,500 surface wounds and 12,889 injuries, were entered into SWM, surface wounds averaged 3.0 per casualty and injuries averaged 11.2 per casualty. Of the 3,500 surface wounds, 2,496 (71%) were entrance wounds with 6,631 (51%) associated internal injuries, with 2.2 entrance wounds and 5.8 associated injuries per casualty (some details cannot be given because of operational security). Crude deaths rates were calculated using Maximum AIS-Military. CONCLUSION: These new tools have been successfully implemented to describe combat injury, mortality, and distribution of wounds and associated injuries. AIS 2005-Military is a more precise assignment of severity to military injuries. SWM has brought data from all three combat registries together into one analyzable database. SWM and SWAT allow visualization of wounds and associated injuries by region on a 3D model of the body.

Thromboembolic complications following trauma.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have reported an increased incidence of thromboembolic complications following trauma. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a literature review and queried the National Trauma Data Bank to more closely examine the incidence of a variety of thromboembolic complications following injury. RESULTS: Thromboembolic events are rare, but occur at a greater rate in more severely injured patients. It is unclear, however, whether the incidence of thromboembolic complications in trauma patients is on the rise overall. Differences in study populations, particularly injury severity scores, as well as different methods of screening, diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment have led to extreme differences in reported rates. CONCLUSION: While recent research has added to the body of knowledge, continued efforts focusing on risk stratification, diagnosis, screening, prophylaxis, and treatment are necessary to rationally understand the spectrum of thrombotic complications.

The importance of vehicle rollover as a field triage criterion.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article was to review the importance of vehicle rollover as a field triage criterion. In 1987, field triage criteria were developed by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma that have been propagated repeatedly over the subsequent 20+ years. The field triage decision scheme is based on abnormal physiology, obvious abnormal anatomy, mechanism of injury likely to result in severe injury, and other factors (age, etc.) and was supported by available science at that time. In 2005, the triage scheme was revised by a committee, and vehicle rollover as a crash scene triage criterion was dropped in 2006. METHODS: The medical literature and data from the Department of Transportation/National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Fatal Accident Reporting System and the National Automotive Sampling System were analyzed to determine the contribution of rollover to morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Vehicle rollovers represent a small but significant percentage of crashes; of the almost 12 million vehicle crashes reported by NHTSA in 2004, only 2.4% were rollovers, but these accounted for one-third of all crash-related occupant deaths and about 25,000 serious injuries every year. Rollovers are associated with the second highest number of vehicle occupant deaths by crash mode, three times the risk of injury when compared with other impact directions (p < 0.0001), specific types of injury such as head and spinal cord injuries, and a risk of death >15 times the risk in nonrollover crashes. CONCLUSION: The data and literature unequivocally show a strong and disproportionate association between vehicle rollover and injury severity and death. Because it is difficult to devise simple, accurate decision rules for point of wounding and vehicle crash scene triage, simple, powerful relationships should be used when possible. Thus, the exclusion of rollover as a triage criterion seems to be ill advised.

Injuries from explosions: physics, biophysics, pathology, and required research focus.

BACKGROUND: Explosions cause more complex and multiple forms of damage than any other wounding agent, are the leading cause of death on the battlefield, and are often used by terrorists. Because explosion-related injuries are infrequently seen in civilian practice, a broader base of knowledge is needed in the medical community to address acute needs of patients with explosion-related injuries and to broaden mitigation-focused research efforts. The objective of this review is to provide insight into the complexities of explosion-related injury to help more precisely target research efforts to the most pressing areas of need in primary prevention, mitigation, and consequence management. METHODS: An understanding of the physics and biological consequences of explosions together with data on the nature or severity of contemporary combat injuries provide an empiric basis for a comprehensive and balanced portfolio of explosion-related research. Cited works were identified using MeSH terms as directed by subtopic. Uncited information was drawn from the authors' surgical experience in Iraq, analysis of current combat trauma databases, and explosion-related research. RESULTS: Data from Iraq and Afghanistan confirm that survivable injuries from explosions are dominated by penetrating fragment wounds, substantiating longstanding and well-known blast physics mechanisms. Keeping this factual basis in mind will allow for appropriate vectoring of funds to increase understanding of this military and public health problem; address specific research and training needs; and improve mitigation strategies, tactics, and techniques for vehicles and personal protective equipment. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive approach to injury from explosions should include not only primary prevention, but also injury mitigation and consequence management. Recalibration of medical research focus will improve management of injuries from explosions, with profound implications in both civilian and military healthcare systems.

Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Prehospital Triage of Trauma Patients.

Importance: Prehospital trauma triage protocols are used worldwide to get the right patient to the right hospital and thereby improve the chance of survival and avert lifelong disabilities. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma set target levels for undertriage rates of less than 5%. None of the existing triage protocols has been able to achieve this target in isolation. Objective: To develop and validate a new prehospital trauma triage protocol to improve current triage rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter cohort study, all patients with trauma who were 16 years and older and transported to a trauma center in 2 different regions of the Netherlands were included in the analysis. Data were collected from January 1, 2012, through June 30, 2014, in the Central Netherlands region for the design data cohort and from January 1 through December 31, 2015, in the Brabant region for the validation cohort. Data were analyzed from May 3, 2017, through July 19, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: A new prediction model was developed in the Central Netherlands region based on prehospital predictors associated with severe injury. Severe injury was defined as an Injury Severity Score greater than 15. A full-model strategy with penalized maximum likelihood estimation was used to construct a model with 8 predictors that were chosen based on clinical reasoning. Accuracy of the developed prediction model was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration. The model was externally validated in the Brabant region. Results: Using data from 4950 patients with trauma from the Central Netherlands region for the design data set (58.3% male; mean [SD] age, 47 [21] years) and 6859 patients for the validation Brabant region (52.2% male; mean [SD] age, 51 [22] years), the following 8 significant predictors were selected for the prediction model: age; systolic blood pressure; Glasgow Coma Scale score; mechanism criteria; penetrating injury to the head, thorax, or abdomen; signs and/or symptoms of head or neck injury; expected injury in the Abbreviated Injury Scale thorax region; and expected injury in 2 or more Abbreviated Injury Scale regions. The prediction model showed a C statistic of 0.823 (95% CI, 0.813-0.832) and good calibration. The cutoff point with a minimum specificity of 50.0% (95% CI, 49.3%-50.7%) led to a sensitivity of 88.8% (95% CI, 87.5%-90.0%). External validation showed a C statistic of 0.831 (95% CI, 0.814-0.848) and adequate calibration. Conclusions and Relevance: The new prehospital trauma triage prediction model may lower undertriage rates to approximately 10% with an overtriage rate of 50%. The next step should be to implement this prediction model with the use of a mobile app for emergency medical services professionals.

Injury severity and causes of death from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom: 2003-2004 versus 2006.

BACKGROUND: The opinion that injuries sustained in Iraq and Afghanistan have increased in severity is widely held by clinicians who have deployed multiple times. To continuously improve combat casualty care, the Department of Defense has enacted numerous evidence-based policies and clinical practice guidelines. We hypothesized that the severity of wounds has increased over time. Furthermore, we examined cause of death looking for opportunities of improvement for research and training. METHODS: Autopsies of the earliest combat deaths from Iraq and Afghanistan and the latest deaths of 2006 were analyzed to assess changes in injury severity and causes of death. Fatalities were classified as nonsurvivable (NS) or potentially survivable (PS). PS deaths were then reviewed in depth to analyze mechanism and cause. RESULTS: There were 486 cases from March 2003 to April 2004 (group 1) and 496 from June 2006 to December 2006 (group 2) that met inclusion criteria. Of the PS fatalities (group 1: 93 and group 2: 139), the injury severity score was lower in the first group (27 +/- 14 vs. 37 +/- 16, p < 0.001), and had a lower number of abbreviated injury scores >or=4 (1.1 +/- 0.79 vs. 1.5 +/- 0.83 per person, p < 0.001). The main cause of death in the PS fatalities was truncal hemorrhage (51% vs. 49%, p = NS). Deaths per month between groups doubled (35 vs. 71), whereas the case fatality rates between the two time periods were equivalent (11.0 vs. 9.8, p = NS). DISCUSSION: In the time periods of the war studied, deaths per month has doubled, with increases in both injury severity and number of wounds per casualty. Truncal hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially survivable deaths. Arguably, the success of the medical improvements during this war has served to maintain the lowest case fatality rate on record.

Management of Suspected Tension Pneumothorax in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 17-02.

This change to the Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Guidelines that updates the recommendations for management of suspected tension pneumothorax for combat casualties in the prehospital setting does the following things: (1) Continues the aggressive approach to suspecting and treating tension pneumothorax based on mechanism of injury and respiratory distress that TCCC has advocated for in the past, as opposed to waiting until shock develops as a result of the tension pneumothorax before treating. The new wording does, however, emphasize that shock and cardiac arrest may ensue if the tension pneumothorax is not treated promptly. (2) Adds additional emphasis to the importance of the current TCCC recommendation to perform needle decompression (NDC) on both sides of the chest on a combat casualty with torso trauma who suffers a traumatic cardiac arrest before reaching a medical treatment facility. (3) Adds a 10-gauge, 3.25-in needle/ catheter unit as an alternative to the previously recommended 14-gauge, 3.25-in needle/catheter unit as recommended devices for needle decompression. (4) Designates the location at which NDC should be performed as either the lateral site (fifth intercostal space [ICS] at the anterior axillary line [AAL]) or the anterior site (second ICS at the midclavicular line [MCL]). For the reasons enumerated in the body of the change report, participants on the 14 December 2017 TCCC Working Group teleconference favored including both potential sites for NDC without specifying a preferred site. (5) Adds two key elements to the description of the NDC procedure: insert the needle/ catheter unit at a perpendicular angle to the chest wall all the way to the hub, then hold the needle/catheter unit in place for 5 to 10 seconds before removing the needle in order to allow for full decompression of the pleural space to occur. (6) Defines what constitutes a successful NDC, using specific metrics such as: an observed hiss of air escaping from the chest during the NDC procedure; a decrease in respiratory distress; an increase in hemoglobin oxygen saturation; and/or an improvement in signs of shock that may be present. (7) Recommends that only two needle decompressions be attempted before continuing on to the "Circulation" portion of the TCCC Guidelines. After two NDCs have been performed, the combat medical provider should proceed to the fourth element in the "MARCH" algorithm and evaluate/treat the casualty for shock as outlined in the Circulation section of the TCCC Guidelines. Eastridge's landmark 2012 report documented that noncompressible hemorrhage caused many more combat fatalities than tension pneumothorax.1 Since the manifestations of hemorrhagic shock and shock from tension pneumothorax may be similar, the TCCC Guidelines now recommend proceeding to treatment for hemorrhagic shock (when present) after two NDCs have been performed. (8) Adds a paragraph to the end of the Circulation section of the TCCC Guidelines that calls for consideration of untreated tension pneumothorax as a potential cause for shock that has not responded to fluid resuscitation. This is an important aspect of treating shock in combat casualties that was not presently addressed in the TCCC Guidelines. (9) Adds finger thoracostomy (simple thoracostomy) and chest tubes as additional treatment options to treat suspected tension pneumothorax when further treatment is deemed necessary after two unsuccessful NDC attempts-if the combat medical provider has the skills, experience, and authorizations to perform these advanced interventions and the casualty is in shock. These two more invasive procedures are recommended only when the casualty is in refractory shock, not as the initial treatment.

The role of data and safety monitoring in acute trauma resuscitation research.

BACKGROUND: The role of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) in clinical research in acute trauma resuscitation is not well documented. Many of the difficulties conducting acute resuscitation research are exacerbated because multiinstitutional studies are needed to adequately power such research. STUDY DESIGN: The purpose of the study was to demonstrate how a well-organized DSMB, explicitly required for these types of clinical trials by many funding agencies, can be a valuable resource in their safe and successful conduct by maximizing data integrity and striving to standardize care by monitoring the consistent and accurate collection of data and adherence to protocol. As an example, the work of an external DSMB in an international multicenter trial of recombinant activated coagulation factor VIIa (rFVIIa) in blunt and penetrating trauma patients is presented. The DSMB in this study was responsible for reviewing all serious adverse event (SAE) data, performing an extended review of SAEs, and reviewing results of analyses of 48-hour and 30-day mortality according to prespecified study stopping rules. RESULTS: Application by the DSMB of uniform definitions of SAEs substantially improved the integrity of the study data and facilitated analysis of events, such as disseminated coagulopathy, pulmonary complications, and multiple organ failure. As a result of the DSMB's efforts, important insights were gained to guide site selection and conduct of future trials of rFVIIa in trauma-induced hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our experience as members of the study DSMB and on a review of the literature, we recommend a strong role for DSMBs in multicenter trials in acute resuscitative care.

Review of military and civilian trauma registries: Does consensus matter?

BACKGROUND: Structural collection of data from combat injuries is important to improve provided care and the outcome of (combat) casualties. Trauma registries are used in civilian and military health care systems for systematic administration of injury data. However, these registries often use different methods of data management, compromising international comparison of trauma systems. The aim of this review is to aid in reaching international (coalition-wide) consensus for compatible data collection methods with uniform definitions, which is needed for transnational research and subsequent improvement of medical support organizations. METHODS: In this descriptive review, we analyzed different data sets from trauma systems within the American-European context, and included data variables from civilian and military trauma registries. These data sets were analyzed to identify a core set of variables fundamental to describing the tactical context, epidemiology, injury mechanism, injury severity, key treatment, and outcome. RESULTS: A total of 1,672 unique variables, of which 536 military specific, were identified and divided in 11 elemental categories of medical care (patient info, incident info, injury diagnoses, prehospital care, emergency department, imaging, surgical treatment, intensive care, ward, discharge and outcome) and three military-specific categories (forward medical evacuation, prehospital medical treatment facility, and discharge out of theater). A total of 203 key variables were identified and considered fundamental for effective (military) trauma research. CONCLUSION: Well-established and reliable trauma registries and databases are fundamental in (military) trauma care. We recommend implementation of a (concurrent) UN/NATO wide registry system with a track and follow-up system to further improve the quality of care and registration of casualties. Further research should focus on real time aids available on the battlefield and direct storage/upload in trauma databases in theater. Ultimately, sound and valid data support medical decision process and evaluation necessary to save lives on the battlefield.

The state of US trauma systems: public perceptions versus reality--implications for US response to terrorism and mass casualty events.

BACKGROUND: Injury has long been identified as the number one killer of Americans under the age of 34, and establishment of regional trauma systems and centers incorporating primary, secondary, and tertiary care and injury-prevention strategies has proved to be a vital element in reducing injury-related sequelae, deaths, and even costs. Despite these facts, trauma system development has not been given priority for funding in many local and state governments and only intermittently at the federal level. Consequently, many of the nation's trauma centers are strapped for funds to provide emergency care to their patients. STUDY DESIGN: In response to a 2002 Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) report, which identified public support as a key element in the success of trauma system development in states and communities across the United States, a Harris Interactive study was undertaken in the fall of 2004 to determine the public's attitudes, awareness, and knowledge concerning the nature and availability of trauma care and systems of trauma care. Results of the poll were contrasted with current data on the state of US trauma systems to determine the degree of correspondence. RESULTS: Results of the poll indicated that fully 61% of the American public does not know that injury is the leading cause of death for those aged 1 to 34, and most believe that a trauma system is in place in every state. Almost two-thirds of the American public is confident of receiving the best medical care in the event of serious injury and would be seriously concerned if no trauma center were nearby. But only eight states have fully developed trauma systems, and most states have no federal funding or infrastructure in place for managing the aftermath of a natural disaster or terrorist event. These and other objective data reveal the mismatch between public perceptions and reality. CONCLUSIONS: Although almost 90% of Americans believe that state trauma systems and hospitals should have a coordinated trauma response, this has not been made a national priority. Trauma systems must be adequately developed and supported to fulfill the public's expectation to receive the best possible care if seriously injured, and to ensure readiness for mass casualty and terrorist incidents.

The Effect of a Golden Hour Policy on the Morbidity and Mortality of Combat Casualties.

IMPORTANCE: The term golden hour was coined to encourage urgency of trauma care. In 2009, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates mandated prehospital helicopter transport of critically injured combat casualties in 60 minutes or less. OBJECTIVES: To compare morbidity and mortality outcomes for casualties before vs after the mandate and for those who underwent prehospital helicopter transport in 60 minutes or less vs more than 60 minutes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective descriptive analysis of battlefield data examined 21,089 US military casualties that occurred during the Afghanistan conflict from September 11, 2001, to March 31, 2014. Analysis was conducted from September 1, 2014, to January 21, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Data for all casualties were analyzed according to whether they occurred before or after the mandate. Detailed data for those who underwent prehospital helicopter transport were analyzed according to whether they occurred before or after the mandate and whether they occurred in 60 minutes or less vs more than 60 minutes. Casualties with minor wounds were excluded. Mortality and morbidity outcomes and treatment capability-related variables were compared. RESULTS: For the total casualty population, the percentage killed in action (16.0% [386 of 2411] vs 9.9% [964 of 9755]; P < .001) and the case fatality rate ([CFR] 13.7 [469 of 3429] vs 7.6 [1344 of 17,660]; P < .001) were higher before vs after the mandate, while the percentage died of wounds (4.1% [83 of 2025] vs 4.3% [380 of 8791]; P = .71) remained unchanged. Decline in CFR after the mandate was associated with an increasing percentage of casualties transported in 60 minutes or less (regression coefficient, -0.141; P < .001), with projected vs actual CFR equating to 359 lives saved. Among 4542 casualties (mean injury severity score, 17.3; mortality, 10.1% [457 of 4542]) with detailed data, there was a decrease in median transport time after the mandate (90 min vs 43 min; P < .001) and an increase in missions achieving prehospital helicopter transport in 60 minutes or less (24.8% [181 of 731] vs 75.2% [2867 of 3811]; P < .001). When adjusted for injury severity score and time period, the percentage killed in action was lower for those critically injured who received a blood transfusion (6.8% [40 of 589] vs 51.0% [249 of 488]; P < .001) and were transported in 60 minutes or less (25.7% [205 of 799] vs 30.2% [84 of 278]; P < .01), while the percentage died of wounds was lower among those critically injured initially treated by combat support hospitals (9.1% [48 of 530] vs 15.7% [86 of 547]; P < .01). Acute morbidity was higher among those critically injured who were transported in 60 minutes or less (36.9% [295 of 799] vs 27.3% [76 of 278]; P < .01), those severely and critically injured initially treated at combat support hospitals (severely injured, 51.1% [161 of 315] vs 33.1% [104 of 314]; P < .001; and critically injured, 39.8% [211 of 530] vs 29.3% [160 of 547]; P < .001), and casualties who received a blood transfusion (50.2% [618 of 1231] vs 3.7% [121 of 3311]; P < .001), emphasizing the need for timely advanced treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A mandate made in 2009 by Secretary of Defense Gates reduced the time between combat injury and receiving definitive care. Prehospital transport time and treatment capability are important factors for casualty survival on the battlefield.

Time and place of death from automobile crashes: Research endpoint implications.

BACKGROUND: Vehicle crashes are a leading cause of US injury and death. Early death, however, has almost entirely been studied in-hospital. The US Department of Transportation Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) database captures both prehospital and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: FARS location (prehospital, in-hospital) and time of death were reviewed (1978-2013), and a 2003-2005 subgroup of 55,537 early deaths (i.e., between 5 minutes and 4 hours after injury) was analyzed to quantify risk of death over time. RESULTS: There has been an overall decrease in 1978-2013 US vehicle-related deaths (from 3.3 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled to 1.1 and from 22.6 per 100,000 population to 10.4). Snapshots of the death data reveal an overall downward trend of total in-hospital and prehospital deaths. The proportion of hospital deaths decreased by 58%, whereas the proportion of deaths in the prehospital period increased to 56%. Subgroup analysis revealed a rate of mortality risk of 0.4% per minute for the first 30 minutes, 1% per minute for the next 60 minutes, and 0.2% per minute and plateauing thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of census FARS data of motor vehicle crash-related deaths showed an overall 35% decrease in mortality over a period of 36 years. The disproportionate reduction in in-hospital deaths is perhaps a testament to the effectiveness of trauma centers. However, there is a demonstrable need to focus on prehospital deaths with resuscitative and adjuvant therapy research and trauma system design. Quantifying risk of death over time should help focus emergency medical services, trauma system, and resuscitation goals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level III.

Fluid Resuscitation for Hemorrhagic Shock in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 14-01--2 June 2014.

This report reviews the recent literature on fluid resuscitation from hemorrhagic shock and considers the applicability of this evidence for use in resuscitation of combat casualties in the prehospital Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) environment. A number of changes to the TCCC Guidelines are incorporated: (1) dried plasma (DP) is added as an option when other blood components or whole blood are not available; (2) the wording is clarified to emphasize that Hextend is a less desirable option than whole blood, blood components, or DP and should be used only when these preferred options are not available; (3) the use of blood products in certain Tactical Field Care (TFC) settings where this option might be feasible (ships, mounted patrols) is discussed; (4) 1:1:1 damage control resuscitation (DCR) is preferred to 1:1 DCR when platelets are available as well as plasma and red cells; and (5) the 30-minute wait between increments of resuscitation fluid administered to achieve clinical improvement or target blood pressure (BP) has been eliminated. Also included is an order of precedence for resuscitation fluid options. Maintained as recommendations are an emphasis on hypotensive resuscitation in order to minimize (1) interference with the body's hemostatic response and (2) the risk of complications of overresuscitation. Hextend is retained as the preferred option over crystalloids when blood products are not available because of its smaller volume and the potential for long evacuations in the military setting.