Developing a Comparative Effective Methodology for Technology Usability During a Simulated Casualty Event.

INTRODUCTION: Future combat environments will be complex, making effective care for multi-domain battlefield injuries more challenging. Technology and resources are essential to reduce provider burden enabling more accurate assessments, decision-making support, expanded treatment, and outcome improvements. Experimentation exercises to evaluate concepts and technologies to incorporate into the Army's future force ensure rapid and continuous integration across air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace domains to overmatch adversaries. A medical lane was first integrated on the communications networks for experimentation in 2022. We describe a project to develop a method for empirically comparing devices intended to support combat casualty care through high-fidelity simulation in preparation for an Army experimentation exercise. METHODS: Six medics participated in a series of high-fidelity simulation medical casualty injury scenarios with and without technology devices. The participants provided usability information about their care delivery experiences using the System Usability Scale and Adapted Telehealth Usability Questionnaire-Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Command and qualitative feedback. RESULTS: A comparative effectiveness design compared the devices regarding their usability, size, weight, and power with the addition of cost, connectivity, and cyber security, and the qualitative feedback this methodology holistically assessed the technologies as they were applied in the combat casualty care scenario. CONCLUSIONS: Results were used by decision makers to determine technology inclusion in experimentation exercise, develop proof of concept methodology to scale for the exercise, and provide technology developers feedback for iterative updates of their devices before participation in experimentation exercise. This project supports the body of simulation studies conducted to understand combat casualty care. It is one of few empirical medical technology assessments with medical personnel end user input that has been reported. The methodology incorporates a user-centered design for rapid technology improvements before fielding.

Usability Enhancements to a Prototype Clinical Decision Support System for Combat Medics.

INTRODUCTION: A Clinical Decision Support System that provides just-in-time medical guidance at the point of injury is being developed. To develop a user interface, a user-centered design approach was taken. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To evaluate the system, personas of the users were created, a comparative analysis of the system against the Tactical Combat Casualty Care Card and Battlefield Assisted Trauma Distributed Observation Kit was completed, and user testing was performed. RESULTS: Many design recommendations were gathered from the user-centered design approach including replacing buttons with a homunculus, replacing prompts with a tree and node system, and allowing more user freedom in working with the system. CONCLUSIONS: Through multiple different evaluations, design recommendations for a clinical decision support system were implemented in an iterative process. More iterations and more formalized user testing are planned to maximize the usability of the system.

Evaluation of Contingency Telemedical Support to Improve Casualty Care at a Simulated Military Intermediate Resuscitation Facility: The EM-ANGEL Study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether Contingency Telemedical Support (CTS) improves the success rate and efficiency of primary care providers performing critical actions during simulated combat trauma resuscitation. Critical actions included advanced airway, chest decompression, extremity hemorrhage control, hypothermia prevention, antibiotics and analgesics, and hypotensive resuscitation, among others. BACKGROUND: Recent studies report improved survival associated with skilled triage and treatment in the out-of-hospital/preoperative phase of combat casualty care. Historically, ground combat units are assigned primary care physicians and physician assistants as medical staff, due to resource limitations. Although they are recognized as optimal resuscitators, demand for military trauma surgeons and emergency physicians exceeds supply and is unlikely to improve in the near term. METHODS: A prospective trial of telemedical mentoring during a casualty resuscitation encounter was studied using a high-fidelity patient simulator (HFPS). Subjects were randomized and formed into experimental (CTS) or control teams. CTS team leaders were equipped with a headset/microphone interface and telementored by a combat-experienced emergency physician or trauma surgeon. A standardized, scripted clinical scenario and HFPS were used with 14 critical actions. At completion, subjects were surveyed. Statistical approach included contingency table analysis, two-tailed t-test, and correlation coefficient. This study was reviewed and approved by our institutional review board (IRB). RESULTS: Eighteen CTS teams and 16 control teams were studied. By intention-to-treat ITT analysis, 89% of CTS teams versus 56% of controls completed all life-threatening inventions (LSIs) (p<.01); 78% versus 19% completed all critical actions (p<.01); and 89% versus 56% established advanced airways within 8 minutes (p<.06). Average time to completion in minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] 95) was 12 minutes (10?14) for CTS versus 18 (16?20) for controls, with 75% of control teams not completing all critical actions. CONCLUSION: In this model, real-time telementoring of simulated trauma resuscitation was feasible and improved accuracy and efficiency of non?emergency-trained resuscitators. Clinical validation and replicated study of these findings for guiding remote damage control resuscitation are warranted.