How are we currently training and maintaining clinical readiness of US and UK military surgeons responsible for managing head, face and neck wounds on deployment?

INTRODUCTION: The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan provided military surgeons from the USA and the UK with extensive experience into the management of injuries to the head, face and neck (HFN) from high energy bullets and explosive weaponry. The challenge is now to maintain the expertise in managing such injuries for future military deployments. METHODS: The manner in which each country approaches four parameters required for a surgeon to competently treat HFN wounds in deployed military environments was compared. These comprised initial surgical training (residency/registrar training), surgical fellowships, hospital type and appointment as an attending (USA) or consultant (UK) and predeployment training. RESULTS: Neither country has residents/registrars undertaking surgical training that is military specific. The Major Trauma and Reconstructive Fellowship based in Birmingham UK and the Craniomaxillofacial Trauma fellowship at Duke University USA provide additional training directly applicable to managing HFN trauma on deployment. Placement in level 1 trauma/major trauma centres is encouraged by both countries but is not mandatory. US surgeons attend one of three single-service predeployment courses, of which HFN skills are taught on both cadavers and in a 1-week clinical placement in a level 1 trauma centre. UK surgeons attend the Military Operational Surgical Training programme, a 1-week course that includes 1 day dedicated to teaching HFN injury management on cadavers. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple specialties of surgeon seen in the civilian environment are unlikely to be present, necessitating development of extended competencies. Military-tailored fellowships are capable of generating most of these skills early in a career. Regular training courses including simulation are required to maintain such skills and should not be given only immediately prior to deployment. Strong evidence exists that military consultants and attendings should only work at level 1/major trauma centres.

Skill sets required for the management of military head, face and neck trauma: a multidisciplinary consensus statement.

INTRODUCTION: The evolution of medical practice is resulting in increasing subspecialisation, with head, face and neck (HFN) trauma in a civilian environment usually managed by a combination of surgical specialties working as a team. However, the full combination of HFN specialties commonly available in the NHS may not be available in future UK military-led operations, necessitating the identification of a group of skill sets that could be delivered by one or more deployed surgeons. METHOD: A systematic review was undertaken to identify those surgical procedures performed to treat acute military head, face, neck and eye trauma. A multidisciplinary consensus group was convened following this with military HFN trauma expertise to define those procedures commonly required to conduct deployed, in-theatre HFN surgical combat trauma management. RESULTS: Head, face, neck and eye damage control surgical procedures were identified as comprising surgical cricothyroidotomy, cervico-facial haemorrhage control and decompression of orbital haemorrhage through lateral canthotomy. Acute in-theatre surgical skills required within 24 hours consist of wound debridement, surgical tracheostomy, decompressive craniectomy, intracranial pressure monitor placement, temporary facial fracture stabilisation for airway management or haemorrhage control and primary globe repair. Delayed in-theatre procedures required within 5 days prior to predicted evacuation encompass facial fracture fixation, delayed lateral canthotomy, evisceration, enucleation and eyelid repair. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of those skill sets required for deployment is in keeping with the General Medical Council's current drive towards credentialing consultants, by which a consultant surgeon's capabilities in particular practice areas would be defined. Limited opportunities currently exist for trainees and consultants to gain experience in the management of traumatic head, face, neck and eye injuries seen in a kinetic combat environment. Predeployment training requires that the surgical techniques described in this paper are covered and should form the curriculum of future military-specific surgical fellowships. Relevant continued professional development will be necessary to maintain required clinical competency.

Oral and maxillofacial surgical contribution to 21 months of operating theatre activity in Kandahar Field Hospital: 1 February 2007-31 October 2008.

Our aim was to assess oral and maxillofacial operating theatre activity at the NATO Multinational Medical Unit at Kandahar Airfield (MMU KAF). We made a retrospective analysis of the theatre logbook of the MMU KAF between 1 February 2007 and 31 October 2008. During that period, 1778 operations were done for 1639 patients. A total of 563 local civilians (34% of all patients) were operated on. Oral and maxillofacial surgeons were involved in 322/1778 (18%), general surgeons in 943/1778 (53%), and orthopaedic surgeons in 716/1778 (40%) of operations. Neurosurgeons were present only between March and October 2008, resulting in them being involved in 73/789 procedures (9%). Debridement and closure of wounds were the most common procedures in all specialties. A total of 247 operations on the face, neck, and scalp made up 16% of the total operations for trauma (n=1556), but most for coalition service personnel (n=69, 24%). Only 28 operations (10%) on coalition service personnel were done on the torso. This could be accounted for by the increased numbers of blast injuries and the effectiveness of modern body armour among coalition forces. Brain injuries were also more common among this group of patients than among the other groups, showing that helmets have only a limited effect in protecting against the effects of blast injury. Of all procedures, 163 operations (9%) were done for children. Training of general surgeons is becoming more specialised, which may result in greater dependence on larger teams of subspecialists (including oral and maxillofacial surgeons) in future conflicts.