Limitations of Triage in Military Mass Casualty Response: A Case Series.

INTRODUCTION: Mass casualty events (MASCALs) in the combat environment, which involve large numbers of casualties that overwhelm immediately available resources, are fundamentally chaotic and dynamic and inherently dangerous. Formal triage systems use diagnostic algorithms, colored markers, and four or more named categories. We hypothesized that formal triage systems are inadequately trained and practiced and too complex to successfully implement in true MASCAL events. This retrospective analysis evaluates the real-world application of triage systems in prehospital military MASCALs and other aspects of MASCAL management. METHODS: We surveyed Special Operations Forces (SOF) medics known to us who have participated in military prehospital MASCALs and analyzed them. Aggregated data describing the scope of the incidents, the use of formal triage algorithms and colored markers, the number of categories, and the interventions on scene were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and lessons learned were consolidated. RESULTS: From 1996 to 2022 we identified 29 MASCALs that were managed by military medics in the prehospital setting. There was a median of three providers (range 1-85) and 15 casualties (range 6-519) per event. Four or more formal triage categories were used in only one event. Colored markers and formal algorithms were not used. Life-saving interventions were performed in 27 of 29 (93%) missions and blood transfusions were performed in four (17%) MASCALs. The top lessons learned were: 1) security and accountability are cornerstones of MASCAL management; 2) casualty movement is a priority; 3) intuitive triage categories are the default; 4) life-saving interventions are performed as time and tactics permit. CONCLUSION: Formal triage systems requiring the use of diagnostic algorithms, colored tags, and four or five categories are seldom implemented in real-world military prehospital MASCAL management. The training of field triage should be simplified and pragmatic, as exemplified by these instances.

Hypothermia and the Global War on Terror: 18 Years of Minimal Progress.

INTRODUCTION: The association between hypothermia, coagulopathy, and acidosis in trauma is well described. Hypothermia mitigation starts in the prehospital setting; however, it is often a secondary focus after other life-saving interventions. The deployed environment further compounds the problem due to prolonged evacuation times in rotary wing aircraft, resource limitations, and competing priorities. This analysis evaluates hypothermia in combat casualties and the relationship to resuscitation strategy with blood products. METHODS: Using the data from the Department of Defense Joint Trauma Registry from 2003 to 2021, a retrospective analysis was conducted on adult trauma patients. Inclusion criteria was arrival at the first military treatment facility (MTF) hypothermic (<95ºF). Study variables included: mortality, year, demographics, battle vs non-battle injury, mechanism, theater of operation, vitals, and labs. Subgroup analysis was performed on severely injured (15 < ISS < 75) hypothermic trauma patients resuscitated with whole blood (WB) vs only component therapy. RESULTS: Of the 69,364 patients included, 908 (1.3%) arrived hypothermic; the vast majority of whom (N = 847, 93.3%) arrived mildly hypothermic (90-94.9°F). Overall mortality rate was 14.8%. Rates of hypothermia varied by year from 0.7% in 2003 to 3.9% in 2014 (P <0.005). On subgroup analysis, mortality rates were similar between patients resuscitated with WB vs only component therapy; though base deficit values were higher in the WB cohort (-10 vs -6, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite nearly 20 years of combat operations, hypothermia continues to be a challenge in military trauma and is associated with a high mortality rate. Mortality was similar between hypothermic trauma patients resuscitated with WB vs component therapy, despite greater physiologic derangements on arrival in patients who received WB. As the military has the potential to conduct missions in environments where the risk of hypothermia is high, further research into hypothermia mitigation techniques and resuscitation strategies in the deployed setting is warranted.

Designing the Prolonged Field Care Kit (PFAK) to Address the Logistical Challenges of Future Combat Casualty Care.

INTRODUCTION: Prolonged Casualty Care (PCC) is a military adaptation aimed at providing pre-hospital care in austere settings when evacuation is delayed or even impossible. Current lack of standardized medical equipment and size/weight restrictions of military packs during dismounted operations hinder effective PCC. We sought to design a standardized, practical, and effective prolonged field care kit (PFAK) to enable widespread implementation of PCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed Joint Trauma System Clinical Practice Guidelines to generate a list of potential contents of the PFAK. We obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) exemption and then conducted stakeholder surveys of combat casualty care experts across the Joint Trauma System using a modified Delphi survey approach. We established a civil-military working group that provided in-depth qualitative feedback on the PFAK contents and provided an initial design of a long-range medical rucksack (LMR) to house it. Responses were analyzed using mean rank scores to help determine initial components of the PFAK. Tactical subject-matter experts tested and evaluated the PFAK and LMR prototype in austere conditions to refine the design. RESULTS: Review of the PCC Clinical Practice Guidelines generated 49 medications and 301 potential supplies as potential PFAK contents. The first Delphi survey was sent to 100 stakeholders (overall response rate of 60%). After the first survey, contents were narrowed to a list of the most essential 27 medications and 105 other components. Iterative prototypes of the PFAK and LMR were tested to determine ergonomics, portability, flexibility, and equipment compartmentalization to facilitate use in emergencies. The prototype was optimized to address the clinical, logistical, and tactical requirements of PCC across a variety of platforms and environmental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Given the changing battlefield environment, efficient and effective PCC will play an increasingly important role in the management of combat trauma. The PFAK can meet this need by providing a practical and standardized resuscitation kit generated by expert military and trauma personnel consensus, carried conveniently in the LMR.

The thin red line: Blood planning factors and the enduring need for a robust military blood system to support combat operations.

ABSTRACT: Battlefield lessons learned are forgotten; the current name for this is the Walker Dip. Blood transfusion and the need for a Department of Defense Blood Program are lessons that have cycled through being learned during wartime, forgotten, and then relearned during the next war. The military will always need a blood program to support combat and contingency operations. Also, blood supply to the battlefield has planning factors that have been consistent over a century. In 2024, it is imperative that we codify these lessons learned. The linchpins of modern combat casualty care are optimal prehospital care, early whole blood transfusion, and forward surgical care. This current opinion comprised of authors from all three military Services, the Joint Trauma System, the Armed Services Blood Program, blood SMEs and the CCC Research Program discuss two vital necessities for a successful military trauma system: (1) the need for an Armed Services Blood Program and (2) Planning factors for current and future deployed military ere is no effective care for wounded soldiers, and by extension there is no effective military medicine.

A trauma expert consensus: Capabilities are required early to improve survivability from traumatic injury.

BACKGROUND: Mortality reviews examine US military fatalities resulting from traumatic injuries during combat operations. These reviews are essential to the evolution of the military trauma system to improve individual, unit, and system-level trauma care delivery and inform trauma system protocols and guidelines. This study identifies specific prehospital and hospital interventions with the potential to provide survival benefits. METHODS: US Special Operations Command fatalities with battle injuries deemed potentially survivable (2001-2021) were extracted from previous mortality reviews. A military trauma review panel consisting of trauma surgeons, forensic pathologists, and prehospital and emergency medicine specialists conducted a methodical review to identify prehospital, hospital, and resuscitation interventions (e.g., laparotomy, blood transfusion) with the potential to have provided a survival benefit. RESULTS: Of 388 US Special Operations Command battle-injured fatalities, 100 were deemed potentially survivable. Of these (median age, 29 years; all male), 76.0% were injured in Afghanistan, and 75% died prehospital. Gunshot wounds were in 62.0%, followed by blast injury (37%), and blunt force injury (1.0%). Most had a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale severity classified as 4 (severe) (55.0%) and 5 (critical) (41.0%). The panel recommended 433 interventions (prehospital, 188; hospital, 315). The most recommended prehospital intervention was blood transfusion (95%), followed by finger/tube thoracostomy (47%). The most common hospital recommendations were thoracotomy and definitive vascular repair. Whole blood transfusion was assessed for each fatality: 74% would have required ≥10 U of blood, 20% would have required 5 to 10 U, 1% would have required 1 to 4 U, and 5% would not have required blood products to impact survival. Five may have benefited from a prehospital laparotomy. CONCLUSION: This study systematically identified capabilities needed to provide a survival benefit and examined interventions needed to inform trauma system efforts along the continuum of care. The determination was that blood transfusion and massive transfusion shortly after traumatic injury would impact survival the most. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level V.

Complexities of autonomy in military medical ethics: A brief report.

ABSTRACT: The first Fallen Surgeons Military Educational Symposium was convened in conjunction with the the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) 23 meeting, under the guidance of the AAST Military Liaison Committee. The daylong session included a 1.5-hour segment on military medical ethics in combat and its unique challenges. Medical ethical issues arise frequently within the military across a range of varied circumstances, from the day-to-day operations of stateside forces to the complexities of deployed troops in theaters of conflict. Given the scope of these circumstances, preparation and advanced planning are the key to addressing and resolving the ethical issues that occur. The goal of this session was to present illustrative cases, not to prescribe solutions, and to make the attendees aware of some of the challenges they may encounter when deployed.

Who needs a tourniquet? And who does not? Lessons learned from a review of tourniquet use in the Russo-Ukrainian war.

BACKGROUND: Extremity tourniquets have proven to be lifesaving in both civilian and military settings and should continue to be used by first responders for trauma patients with life-threatening extremity bleeding. This is especially true in combat scenarios in which both the casualty and the first responder may be confronted by the imminent threat of death from hostile fire as the extremity hemorrhage is being treated. Not every extremity wound, however, needs a tourniquet. One of the most important aspects of controlling life-threatening extremity bleeding with tourniquets is to recognize what magnitude of bleeding requires this intervention and what magnitude of bleeding does not. Multiple studies, both military and civilian, have shown that tourniquets are often applied when they are not medically indicated. Overuse of extremity tourniquets has not caused excess morbidity in either the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan or in the US urban civilian setting. In the presence of prolonged evacuation, however, applying a tourniquet when it is not medically indicated changes tourniquet application from being a lifesaving intervention to one that may cause an avoidable amputation and the development of an array of metabolic derangements and acute kidney injury collectively called prolonged tourniquet application syndrome. METHODS: The recent literature was reviewed for papers that documented the complications of tourniquet use resulting from the prolonged casualty evacuation times being seen in the current Russo-Ukrainian war. The literature was also reviewed for the incidence of tourniquet application that was found to not be medically indicated, in both the US civilian setting and from Ukraine. Finally, an in-person meeting of the US/Ukraine Tourniquet Working Group was held in Warsaw, Poland, in December of 2023. RESULTS: Unnecessary loss of extremities and life-threatening episodes of prolonged tourniquet application syndrome are currently occurring in Ukrainian combat forces because of nonindicated tourniquet use combined with the prolonged evacuation time seen in the Russo-Ukrainian war. Specific numbers of the complications experienced as a result of tourniquet use by Ukrainian forces in the current conflict are treated as classified information and are not available, but multiple sources from the Ukrainian military medical personnel and from the US advisors providing medical assistance to Ukraine have all agreed that the problem is substantial. CONCLUSION: Unnecessary tourniquet morbidity might also occur in US forces in a variety of potential future combat scenarios in which evacuation to surgical care is delayed. Prehospital trauma training programs, including but not limited to tactical combat casualty care, place insufficient emphasis on the need to avoid leaving tourniquets in place when they are not medically indicated. This aspect of training should receive emphasis in future Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and civilian first responder curriculum development. An interim ad hoc training solution on this topic is available at the websites noted in this articles. Additional training modalities may follow in the near future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

A safety and feasibility analysis on the use of cold-stored platelets in combat trauma.

BACKGROUND: Damage-control resuscitation has come full circle, with the use of whole blood and balanced components. Lack of platelet availability may limit effective damage-control resuscitation. Platelets are typically stored and transfused at room temperature and have a short shelf-life, while cold-stored platelets (CSPs) have the advantage of a longer shelf-life. The US military introduced CSPs into the battlefield surgical environment in 2016. This study is a safety analysis for the use of CSPs in battlefield trauma. METHODS: The Department of Defense Trauma Registry and Armed Services Blood Program databases were queried to identify casualties who received room-temperature-stored platelets (RSPs) or both RSPs and CSPs between January 1, 2016, and February 29, 2020. Characteristics of recipients of RSPs and RSPs-CSPs were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients were identified; 131 (47.8%) received RSPs and 143 (52.2%) received RSPs-CSPs. The casualties were mostly male (97.1%), similar in age (31.7 years), with a median Injury Severity Score of 22. There was no difference in survival for recipients of RSPs (88.5%) versus RSPs-CSPs (86.7%; p = 0.645). Adverse events were similar between the two cohorts. Blood products received were higher in the RSPs-CSPs cohort compared with the RSPs cohort. The RSPs-CSPs cohort had more massive transfusion (53.5% vs. 33.5%, p = 0.001). A logistic regression model demonstrated that use of RSPs-CSPs was not associated with mortality, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.96 (p > 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-2.25). CONCLUSION: In this safety analysis of RSPs-CSPs compared with RSPs in a combat setting, survival was similar between the two groups. Given the safety and logistical feasibility, the results support continued use of CSPs in military environments and further research into how to optimize resuscitation strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Advancing Combat Casualty Care Statistics and Other Battlefield Care Metrics.

Aggregate statistics can provide intra-conflict and inter-conflict mortality comparisons and trends within and between U.S. combat operations. However, capturing individual-level data to evaluate medical and non-medical factors that influence combat casualty mortality has historically proven difficult. The Department of Defense (DoD) Trauma Registry, developed as an integral component of the Joint Trauma System during recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, has amassed individual-level data that have afforded greater opportunity for a variety of analyses and comparisons. Although aggregate statistics are easily calculated and commonly used across the DoD, other issues that require consideration include the impact of individual medical interventions, non-medical factors, non-battle-injured casualties, and incomplete or missing medical data, especially for prehospital care and forward surgical team care. Needed are novel methods to address these issues in order to provide a clearer interpretation of aggregate statistics and to highlight solutions that will ultimately increase survival and eliminate preventable death on the battlefield. Although many U.S. military combat fatalities sustain injuries deemed non-survivable, survival among these casualties might be improved using primary and secondary prevention strategies that prevent injury or reduce injury severity. The current commentary proposes adjustments to traditional aggregate combat casualty care statistics by integrating statistics from the DoD Military Trauma Mortality Review process as conducted by the Joint Trauma System and Armed Forces Medical Examiner System.

A Joint Trauma System Clinical Practice Guideline: Traumatic Brain Injury Management and Basic Neurosurgery in the Deployed Environment.

Management of the patient with moderate to severe brain injury in any environment can be time consuming and resource intensive. These challenges are magnified while forward deployed in austere or hostile environments. This Joint Trauma System Clinical Practice Guideline provides recommendations for the treatment and medical management of casualties with moderate to severe head injuries in an environment where personnel, resources, and follow-on care are limited. These guidelines have been developed by acknowledging commonly recognized recommendations for neurosurgical and neuro-critical care patients and augmenting those evaluations and interventions based on the experience of neurosurgeons, trauma surgeons, and intensivists who have delivered care during recent coalition conflicts.

Sustaining Military Surgeons and the Joint Trauma System: Current Efforts, Unique Challenges, and Proposed Strategies in an Era of Global Uncertainty.

Mini abstract US military assets have been integral to the response to global pandemics, natural disasters, civilian casualties, and combat care. Strategies are being implemented to strengthen the military health care system and curtail the erosion of relevant surgical skills and knowledge during periods of low combat intensity. However, additional challenges remain. We describe these strategies and obstacles but also explore potential solutions that may strengthen the readiness of military surgeons and combat trauma teams.

Optimizing Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS®) to Maximize Readiness.

INTRODUCTION: The Army utilizes Individual Critical Task Lists (ICTLs) to track and ensure competency and deployment readiness of its medical service members. ICTLs are the various skills and procedures that the Army has deemed foundational for each area of concentration (AOC)/military occupational specialty (MOS). While many ICTLs involve the patient care that military medical providers regularly provide, some procedures are not as commonly performed. This, when coupled with lower patient volume at military treatment facilities (MTF), poses a challenge for maintaining skill competency and deployment readiness. Fort Campbell's Blanchfield Army Community Hospital (BACH) has created a holistic and unique solution to meet many of these standardized requirements and support a ready medical force. By optimizing the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS®) course curriculum to facilitate ICTL completion, BACH has increased its ICTL completion rates, ATLS® course exposure, and streamlined training requirements. The purpose of this article is to describe this best practice and suggest its applicability to other MTFs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: By cross-referencing the ATLS® course curriculum and appendices with ICTLs, BACH has augmented ATLS® course certification with the additional completion of 12 ICTLs. This new approach not only increases ICTL completion, but also increases ATLS® curriculum exposure to medical providers, such as Registered Nurses or Nurse Practitioners, who would not typically take ATLS®. RESULTS: Since starting this new approach in April 2021, 73 military medical personnel have completed the ATLS® course at BACH, with 24 different medical specialties represented. A total of 361 ICTLs have been completed with specific ICTL completion counts ranging from 13 to 48. Each ICTL tested was completed 100% of its annual requirement. CONCLUSION: ATLS® is a mandatory joint interoperability standard for military physicians and it is also an Army ICTL for many AOCs/MOSs. Only counting completion of this course as one ICTL is a missed opportunity for the time spent by Army medical providers and limits the exposure of ATLS® to select AOCs/MOSs. This optimized and novel approach has been successful at BACH, suggesting its applicability at other MTFs that serve as ATLS® testing sites.

Type-specific whole blood still has a role in the era of low-titer O universal donor transfusion for severe trauma hemorrhage.

ABSTRACT: Whole blood can be ABO-type specific (type-specific whole blood (TSWB)) or low-titer O universal donor (low-titer O whole blood (LTOWB)). Having previously used LTOWB, the US Armed Forces Blood Program began using TSWB in 1965 as a method of increasing the donor pool. In contrast to military practice, the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies formerly the American association of blood banks (AABB), from its first guidelines in 1958 until 2018, permitted only TSWB. Attempting to reduce time to transfusion, the US military reintroduced LTOWB in the deployed environment in 2015; this practice was endorsed by the AABB in 2018 and is progressively being implemented by military and civilian providers worldwide. Low-titer O whole blood is the only practical solution prehospital. However, there are several reasons to retain the option of TSWB in hospitals with a laboratory. These include (1) as-yet ill-defined risks of immunological complications from ABO-incompatible plasma (even when this has low titers of anti-A and -B), (2) risks of high volumes of LTOWB including published historical advice (based on clinical experience) not to transfuse type-specific blood for 2 to 3 weeks following a substantial LTOWB transfusion, (3) uncertainty as to the optimal definition of "low titer," and (4) expanding the potential donor pool by allowing type-specific transfusion. Several large randomized controlled trials currently underway are comparing LTOWB with component therapy, but none address the question of LTOWB versus TSWB. There are sufficient data to suggest that the additional risks of transfusing LTOWB to non-group O recipients should be avoided by using TSWB as soon as possible. Combined with the advantage of maintaining an adequate supply of blood products in times of high demand, this suggests that retaining TSWB within the civilian and military blood supply system is desirable. TSWB should be preferred when patient blood group is confirmed in facilities with a hematology laboratory, with LTOWB reserved for patients whose blood group is unknown.

Putting the ready in readiness: A post hoc analysis of surgeon performance during a military mass casualty situation in Afghanistan.

BACKGROUND: All military surgeons must maintain trauma capabilities for expeditionary care contexts, yet most are not trauma specialists. Maintaining clinical readiness for trauma and mass casualty care is a significant challenge for military and civilian surgeons. We examined the effect of a prescribed clinical readiness program for expeditionary trauma care on the surgical performance of 12 surgeons during a 60-patient mass-casualty situation (MASCAL). METHODS: The sample included orthopedic (four) and general surgeons (eight) who cared for MASCAL victims at Hamad Karzai International Airport, Kabul, Afghanistan, on August 26, 2021. One orthopedic and two general surgeons had prior deployment experience. The prescribed program included three primary measures of clinical readiness: 1, expeditionary knowledge (examination score); 2, procedural skills competencies (performance assessment score); and 3, clinical activity (operative practice profile metric). Data were attained from program records for each surgeon in the sample. Each of the 60 patient cases was reviewed and rated (performance score) by the Joint Trauma System's Performance Improvement Branch, a military-wide performance improvement organization. All scores were normalized to facilitate direct comparisons using effect size calculations between each predeployment measure and MASCAL surgical care. RESULTS: Predeployment knowledge and clinical activity measures met program benchmarks. Baseline predeployment procedural skills competency scores did not meet program benchmarks; however, those gaps were closed through retraining, ensuring all surgeons met or exceeded the program benchmarks predeployment. There were very large effect sizes (Cohen's d ) between all program measures and surgical care score, confirming the relationship between the program measures and MASCAL trauma care provided by the 12 surgeons. CONCLUSION: The prescribed program measures ensured that all surgeons achieved predeployment performance benchmarks and provided high-quality trauma care to our nation's service members. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

A 20-year retrospective analysis of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism among combat casualties requiring damage-control laparotomy at US military Role 2 surgical units.

BACKGROUND: Combat casualties receiving damage-control laparotomy at forward deployed, resource-constrained US military Role 2 (R2) surgical units require multiple evacuations, but the added risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in this population has not been defined. To fill this gap, we retrospectively analyzed 20 years of Department of Defense Trauma Registry data to define the VTE rate in this population. METHODS: Department of Defense Trauma Registry from 2002 to 2023 was queried for US military combat casualties requiring damage-control laparotomy at R2. All deaths were excluded in subsequent analysis. Rates of VTE were assessed, and subgroup analysis was performed on patients requiring massive transfusion. RESULTS: Department of Defense Trauma Registry (n = 288) patients were young (mean age, 25 years) and predominantly male (98%) with severe (mean Injury Severity Score, 26), mostly penetrating injury (76%) and high mortality. Venous thromboembolism rate was high: 15.8% (DVT, 10.3%; pulmonary embolism, 7.1%). In the massively transfused population, the VTE rate was even higher (26.7% vs. 10.2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This is the first report that combat casualties requiring damage-control laparotomy at R2 have such high VTE rates. Therefore, for military casualties, we propose screening ultrasound upon arrival to each subsequent capable echelon of care and low threshold for initiating thromboprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.