Injury trends aboard US Navy vessels: A 50-year analysis of mishaps at sea.

BACKGROUND: Maritime activities have been associated with unique dangers to civilian and military sailors. We performed a retrospective cohort study analyzing injury mechanisms and clinical outcomes of casualties onboard US naval ships to determine common injury mechanisms, trends, and outcomes. We hypothesized there would be a downward trend of injuries and fatalities on US naval ships during the study period. METHODS: All mishaps recorded by the Naval Safety Command aboard active service US naval ships from 1970 through 2020 were reviewed. Only mishaps resulting in injury or fatality were included. Over time, injury mechanisms and casualty incidence rates were trended and compared based on medical capabilities. Ships without surgical capabilities were categorized as Role 1, and those with surgical capabilities as Role 2. RESULTS: There were a total of 3,127 casualties identified and analyzed, with 1,048 fatalities and 2,079 injuries. The injury mechanisms associated with the highest mortality included electrocution, blunt head trauma, fall from height, man overboard, and explosion. There was a decrease in the trend of mishaps resulting in casualties, fatalities, and injuries over the 50-year study period. The mortality rate for select severe injury mechanisms was higher on Role 1 capable platforms, compared with Role 2 (0.334 vs. 0.250, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Casualty incidences decreased over 50 years. However, mortality still remains high for certain mechanisms no matter the operational platform. Furthermore, Role 1 capable vessels have a higher overall mortality rate for severe injuries compared with Role 2. The authors propose training, process improvement, and technology-related solutions to improve outcomes on Role 1 capable naval vessels. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Committee on Surgical Combat Casualty Care position statement: Neurosurgical capability for the optimal management of traumatic brain injury during deployed operations.

BACKGROUND: Experiences over the last three decades of war have demonstrated a high incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI) resulting in a persistent need for a neurosurgical capability within the deployed theater of operations. Despite this, no doctrinal requirement for a deployed neurosurgical capability exists. Through an iterative process, the Joint Trauma System Committee on Surgical Combat Casualty Care (CoSCCC) developed a position statement to inform medical and nonmedical military leaders about the risks of the lack of a specialized neurosurgical capability. METHODS: The need for deployed neurosurgical capability position statement was identified during the spring 2021 CoSCCC meeting. A triservice working group of experienced forward-deployed caregivers developed a preliminary statement. An extensive iterative review process was then conducted to ensure that the intended messaging was clear to senior medical leaders and operational commanders. To provide additional context and a civilian perspective, statement commentaries were solicited from civilian clinical experts including a recently retired military trauma surgeon boarded in neurocritical care, a trauma surgeon instrumental in developing the Brain Injury Guidelines, a practicing neurosurgeon with world-renowned expertise in TBI, and the chair of the Committee on Trauma. RESULTS: After multiple revisions, the position statement was finalized, and approved by the CoSCCC membership in February 2023. Challenges identified include (1) military neurosurgeon attrition, (2) the lack of a doctrinal neurosurgical capabilities requirement during deployed combat operations, and (3) the need for neurosurgical telemedicine capability and in-theater computed tomography scans to triage TBI casualties requiring neurosurgical care. CONCLUSION: Challenges identified regarding neurosurgical capabilities within the deployed trauma system include military neurosurgeon attrition and the lack of a doctrinal requirement for neurosurgical capability during deployed combat operations. To mitigate risk to the force in a future peer-peer conflict, several evidence-based recommendations are made. The solicited civilian commentaries strengthen these recommendations by putting them into the context of civilian TBI management. This neurosurgical capabilities position statement is intended to be a forcing function and a communication tool to inform operational commanders and military medical leaders on the use of these teams on current and future battlefields. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level V.

The Impact of the Maritime Deployment Cycle on the Surgeon's Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Navy routinely deploys aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships throughout the world in support of U.S. strategic interests, each with an embarked single surgeon team. Surgeons and their teams are required to participate in lengthy pre-deployment shipboard certifications before each deployment. Given the well-established relationship of surgeon volume to patient outcome, we aim to compare the impact of land vs. maritime deployments on Navy general surgeon practice patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case logs and pre-deployment training initiation of land-based (n = 8) vs. maritime-based (n = 7) U.S. Navy general surgeons over a 3-year period (2017-2020) were compared. Average cases per week were plotted over 26 weeks before deployment. Student's t-test was utilized for all comparisons. RESULTS: Cases declined for both groups in the weeks before deployment. At 6 months (26 weeks) before deployment, land-based surgeons performed significantly more cases than their maritime colleagues (50.3 vs. 14.0, P = .009). This difference persisted at 16 weeks (13.1 vs. 1.9, P = .011) and 12 weeks (13.1 vs. 1.9, P = .011). Overall, surgeon operative volume fell off earlier for maritime surgeons (16 weeks) than land-based surgeons (8 weeks). Within 8 weeks of deployment, both groups performed a similarly low number of cases as they completed final deployment preparations. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons are a critical component of combat causality care teams. In this analysis, we have demonstrated that both land- and maritime-based U.S. Navy surgeons have prolonged periods away from clinical care before and during deployments; for shipboard surgeons, this deficit is large and may negatively impact patient outcomes in the deployed maritime environment. The authors describe this discrepancy and provide practical doctrinal solutions to close this readiness gap.

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.

Splenic syndrome: a rare indication for splenectomy.

Splenic infarction due to sickle cell trait and high-altitude stress has been reported in the literature. Contributing factors leading to infarction are degree of altitude stress and status of physical condition. Medical therapy, which consists of evacuation from high altitude, intravenous fluids, supplemental oxygen, and pain control, has been the mainstay of treatment. However, some patients require surgical intervention. We describe six patients with sickle cell trait who sustained splenic infarctions due to high-altitude stress; two of these patients required splenectomy for near-total splenic necrosis and intractable pain. A review of the literature demonstrates that the common indications for splenectomy are splenic rupture, extensive splenic necrosis, or persistent abdominal pain.

The Initial Impact of Tele-Critical Care on the Surgical Services of a Community Military Hospital.

Introduction: Mortality is reduced in hospitals staffed with intensivists, however, many smaller military hospitals lack intensivist support. Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton (NHCP) is a Military Treatment Facility (MTF) that operates a 6-bed Intensive Care Unit (ICU) north of its referral center, Naval Medical Center San Diego (NMCSD). To address a gap in NHCP on-site intensivist coverage, a comprehensive Tele-Critical Care (TCC) support system was established between NHCP and NMCSD. To examine the initial impact of telemedicine on surgical ICU patients, we compare NHCP surgical ICU admissions before and after TCC implementation. Materials and methods: Patient care by remote intensivist was achieved utilizing video teleconferencing technology, and remote access to electronic medical records. Standardization was promoted by adopting protocols and mandatory intensivist involvement in all ICU admissions. Surgical ICU admissions prior to TCC implementation (pre-TCC) were compared to those following TCC implementation (post-TCC). Results: Of 828 ICU admissions, 21% were surgical. TCC provided coverage during 35% of the intervention period. Comparing pre-TCC and post-TCC periods, there was a significant increase in the percentage of surgical ICU admissions [15.3 % vs 24.6%, p = 0.01] and the average monthly APACHE II score [4.1vs 6.5, p = 0.03]. The total number of surgical admissions per month also increased [3.9 vs 6.3, p = 0.009]. No adverse outcomes were identified. Conclusion: Implementation of TCC was associated with an increase in the scope and complexity of surgical admissions with no adverse outcomes. Surgeons were able to safely expand the surgical services offered requiring perioperative ICU care to patients who previously may have been transferred. Caring for these types of patients not only maintains the operational readiness of deployable caregivers but patient experience is also enhanced by minimizing transfers away from family. Further exploration of TCC on surgical case volume and complexity is warranted.