Military and Civilian Trauma System Integration: A Global Case Series.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic injury is a leading cause of morbidity globally, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In high-income countries (HICs), it is well documented that military and civilian integration can positively impact trauma care in both healthcare systems, but it is unknown if this synergy could benefit LMICs. This case series examines the variety of integration between the civilian and military systems of various countries and international partnerships to elucidate if there are commonalities in facilitators and barriers. METHODS: A convenience sampling method was utilized to identify subject matter experts on civilian and military trauma system integration. Data were collected and coded through an iterative process, focusing on the historical impetuses and subsequent outcomes of civilian and military trauma care collaboration. RESULTS: Eight total case studies were completed, five addressing specific countries and three addressing international partnerships. Themes which emerged as drivers for integration included history of conflict, geography, and skill maintenance for military physicians. High-level government support was a central theme for successful integration, and financial issues were often seen as the greatest barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Various approaches in civilian-military integration exist throughout the world, and the studied nations and international partnerships demonstrated similar motivators and barriers to integration. This study highlights the need for further investigation, particularly in LMICs, where less is known about integration strategies.

Committee on Surgical Combat Casualty Care position statement on the use of single surgeon teams and invited commentaries.

BACKGROUND: Over the last 20 years of war, there has been an operational need for far forward surgical teams near the point of injury. Over time, the medical footprint of these teams has decreased and the utilization of mobile single surgeon teams (SSTs) by the Services has increased. The increased use of SSTs is because of a tactical mobility requirement and not because of proven noninferiority of clinical outcomes. Through an iterative process, the Committee on Surgical Combat Casualty Care (CoSCCC) reviewed the utilization of SSTs and developed an expert-opinion consensus statement addressing the risks of SST utilization and proposed mitigation strategies. METHODS: A small triservice working group of surgeons with deployment experience, to include SST deployments, developed a statement regarding the risks and benefits of SST utilization. The draft statement was reviewed by a working group at the CoSCCC meeting November 2021 and further refined. This was followed by an extensive iterative review process, which was conducted to ensure that the intended messaging was clear to senior medical leaders and operational commanders. The final draft was voted on by the entire CoSCCC membership. To inform the civilian trauma community, commentaries were solicited from civilian trauma leaders to help put this practice into context and to further the discussion in both military and civilian trauma communities. RESULTS: After multiple revisions, the SST statement was finalized in January 2022 and distributed to the CoSCCC membership for a vote. Of 42 voting members, there were three nonconcur votes. The SST statement underwent further revisions to address CoSCCC voting membership comments. Statement commentaries from the President of the American Association for the Surgery for Trauma, the chair of the Committee on Trauma, the Medical Director of the Military Health System Strategic Partnership with the American College of Surgeons and a recently retired military surgeon we included to put this military relevant statement into a civilian context and further delineate the risks and benefits of including the trauma care paradigm in the Department of Defense (DoD) deployed trauma system. CONCLUSION: The use of SSTs has a role in the operational environment; however, operational commanders must understand the tradeoff between tactical mobility and clinical capabilities. As SST tactical mobility increases, the ability of teams to care for multiple casualty incidents or provide sustained clinical operations decreases. The SST position statement is a communication tool to inform operational commanders and military medical leaders on the use of these teams on current and future battlefields.