Analysis of Prehospital Documentation of Injury-Related Pain Assessment and Analgesic Administration on the Contemporary Battlefield.

In addition to life-saving interventions, the assessment of pain and subsequent administration of analgesia are primary benchmarks for quality emergency medical services care which should be documented and analyzed. Analyze US combat casualty data from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry (DoDTR) with a primary focus on prehospital pain assessment, analgesic administration and documentation. Retrospective cohort study of battlefield prehospital and hospital casualty data were abstracted by DoDTR from available records from 1 September 2007 through 30 June 2011. Data included demographics; injury mechanism; prehospital and initial combat hospital pain assessment documented by standard 0-to-10 numeric rating scale; analgesics administered; and survival outcome. Records were available for 8,913 casualties (median ISS of 5 [IQR 2 to 10]; 98.7% survived). Prehospital analgesic administration was documented for 1,313 cases (15%). Prehospital pain assessment was recorded for 581 cases (7%; median pain score 6 [IQR 3 to 8]), hospital pain assessment was recorded for 5,007 cases (56%; median pain score5 [CI95% 3 to 8]), and 409 cases (5%) had both prehospital and hospital pain assessments that could be paired. In this paired group, 49.1% (201/409) had alleviation of pain evidenced by a decrease in pain score (median 4,, IQR 2 to 5); 23.5% (96/409) had worsening of pain evidenced by an increase in pain score (median 3, CI95 2.8 to 3.7, IQR 1 to 5); 27.4% (112/409) had no change; and the overall difference was an average decrease in pain score of 1.1 (median 0, IQR 0 to 3, p < 0.01). Time-series analysis showed modest increases in prehospital and hospital pain assessment documentation and prehospital analgesic documentation. Our study demonstrates that prehospital pain assessment, management, and documentation remain primary targets for performance improvement on the battlefield. Results of paired prehospital to hospital pain scores and time-series analysis demonstrate both feasibility and benefit of prehospital analgesics. Future efforts must also include an expansion of the prehospital battlefield analgesic formulary.

Battlefield Documentation of Tactical Combat Casualty Care in Afghanistan.

Performance improvement is reliant on information and data, as you cannot improve what you do not measure. The US military went to war in 2001 without an integrated trauma care system to collect and analyze combat casualty care data. By 2006, the conflict in Afghanistan began appreciating the capture and consolidation of hospital care documentation into the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. In contrast, a paucity of documentation has existed for prehospital or tactical combat casualty care (TCCC). Using the 75th Ranger casualty documentation model established in 2005, the Joint Trauma System developed a casualty data collection system for prehospital care using the TCCC Card, the TCCC After Action Report (AAR), and the Prehospital Trauma Registry. In 2013, this system was mandated for use by US forces in Afghanistan. The Joint Trauma System also created and deployed a prehospital team to be an integral part of the Joint Theater Trauma System in Afghanistan. This prehospital team provided prehospital training and facilitated prehospital data capture. Described and analyzed in this report are prehospital data captured in Afghanistan from 2013 to 2014 using the TCCC Card and the TCCC AAR.

Battlefield Analgesia: TCCC Guidelines Are Not Being Followed.

BACKGROUND: Servicemembers injured in combat often experience moderate to severe acute pain. Early and effective pain control in the prehospital setting has been shown to reduce the sequelae of untreated pain. Current data suggest that lack of point-of-injury (POI) analgesia has significant, downstream effects on healthcare quality and associated costs. METHODS: This was a process improvement project to determine the current rate of adherence to existing prehospital pain management guidelines. The records of patients who had sustained a major injury and met current Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) criteria for POI analgesia from July 2013 through March 2014 were reviewed to determine if pain medication was given in accordance with existing guidelines, including medication administration and routes. On 31 October 2013, the new TCCC guidelines were released. The "before" period was from July 2013 through October 2013. The "after" period was from November 2013 through March 2014. RESULTS: During the project period, there were 185 records available for review, with 135 meeting TCCC criteria for POI analgesia (68 pre-, 66 postintervention). Prior to 31 October 2013, 17% of study patients received analgesia within guidelines at the POI compared with 35% in the after period. The most common medication administered pre-and post-release was oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate. Special Operations Forces had higher adherence rates to TCCC analgesia guidelines than conventional forces, but these still were low. CONCLUSION: Less than half of all eligible combat casualties receive any analgesia at the POI. Further research is needed to determine the etiology of such poor adherence to current TCCC guidelines.

Saving Lives on the Battlefield (Part II) ? One Year Later A Joint Theater Trauma System and Joint Trauma System Review of Prehospital Trauma Care in Combined Joint Operations Area?Afghanistan (CJOA-A) Final Report, 30 May 2014.

The United States has achieved unprecedented survival rates, as high as 98%, for casualties arriving alive at the combat hospital. Our military medical personnel are rightly proud of this achievement. Commanders and Servicemembers are confident that if wounded and moved to a Role II or III medical facility, their care will be the best in the world. Combat casualty care, however, begins at the point of injury and continues through evacuation to those facilities. With up to 25% of deaths on the battlefield being potentially preventable, the prehospital environment is the next frontier for making significant further improvements in battlefield trauma care. Strict adherence to the evidence-based Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Guidelines has been proven to reduce morbidity and mortality on the battlefield. However, full implementation across the entire force and commitment from both line and medical leadership continue to face ongoing challenges. This report on prehospital trauma in the Combined Joint Operations Area?Afghanistan (CJOA-A) is a follow-on to the one previously conducted in November 2012 and published in January 2013. Both assessments were conducted by the US Central Command (USCENTCOM) Joint Theater Trauma System (JTTS). Observations for this report were collected from December 2013 to January 2014 and were obtained directly from deployed prehospital providers, medical leaders, and combatant leaders. Significant progress has been made between these two reports with the establishment of a Prehospital Care Division within the JTTS, development of a prehospital trauma registry and weekly prehospital trauma conferences, and CJOA-A theater guidance and enforcement of prehospital documentation. Specific prehospital trauma-care achievements include expansion of transfusion capabilities forward to the point of injury, junctional tourniquets, and universal approval of tranexamic acid.

Junctional Tourniquet Training Experience.

Since 2009, out-of-hospital care of junctional hemorrhage bleeding from the trunk-appendage junctions has changed, in part, due to the newly available junctional tourniquets (JTs) that have been cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration. Given four new models of JT available in 2014, several military services have begun to acquire, train, or even use such JTs in care. The ability of users to be trained in JT use has been observed by multiple instructors. The experience of such instructors has been broad as a group, but their experience as individuals has been neither long nor deep. A gathering into one source of the collective experience of trainers of JT users could permit a collation of useful information to include lessons learned, tips in skill performance, identification of pitfalls of use to avoid, and strategies to optimize user learning. The purpose of the present review is to record the experiences of several medical personnel in their JT training of users to provide a guide for future trainers.

First case report of SAM(r) Junctional tourniquet use in Afghanistan to control inguinal hemorrhage on the battlefield.

Junctional hemorrhage, bleeding that occurs at the junction of the trunk and its appendages, is the most common preventable cause of death from compressible hemorrhage on the battlefield. As of January 2014, four types of junctional tourniquets have been developed and cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Successful use of the Abdominal Aortic Tourniquet (AAT™) and Combat Ready Clamp (CRoC™) has already been reported. We report here the first known prehospital use of the SAM® Junctional Tourniquet (SJT) for a battlefield casualty with inguinal junctional hemorrhage.

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.