Self-Described Training Needs of Special Operations Forces Medics and the Birth of the TACMED Division.

Training needs of Special Operations Forces (SOF) medics were surveyed and new training initiatives have been created to meet their needs. SOF medics perform an array of medical procedures in austere environments with minimal supervision. Medical skills decay over time after initial training and the perceived training needs of active SOF medics were unclear. To fill this gap, active SOF medics (n=57) completed a survey that included confidence ratings and indications of whether additional training would make them more proficient in 70 medical knowledge and procedural skills, assembled into categories by a panel of experts (airway, trauma, neuro, differential diagnosis, administrative, infection, critical care, environmental, other). Data were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and nonparametric statistics at P<.05. Confidence was highest in the trauma, administrative, and airway categories, and lowest in the infection, differential diagnosis, and neuro categories (P<.05 or less). Categories indicating the greatest need for additional training were environmental and critical care, while those indicating lowest need were the airway and trauma categories (P=.05). Additional training was endorsed by >75% of participants in each category. SOF medics also wanted additional training in all areas, preferably hands-on with live patients in realistic scenarios, taught by experienced medics. Findings highlight the training needs of SOF medics and demonstrate the value of bottom-up feedback toward optimizing sustainment training. Based on present findings, two TACMED (Tactical Medicine) Divisions at the SOF Echelon III level were created to meet the sustainment training needs of SOF medics.

A Deeper Dive Into Combat Medic Training.

The recent article by Knisely et al. provides a comprehensive review and summary of recent literature describing simulation techniques, training strategies, and technologies to teach medics combat casualty care skills. Some of the results reported by Knisely et al. align with the findings of our team's work, and these findings may be helpful to military leadership with their ongoing efforts to maintain medical readiness. Accordingly, we provide some additional contextual understanding to the results of Knisely et al. in this commentary. Our team recently published two papers describing the results of a large survey that examined Army medic pre-deployment training. Combining the findings of Knisely et al. along with some of the contextual information from our work, we provide some recommendations for improving and optimizing the pre-deployment training paradigm for medics.

Predeployment training of Army medics assigned to prehospital settings.

BACKGROUND: Medics have numerous responsibilities in the combat theater, which include performing lifesaving interventions, providing basic medical and nursing care, and caring for casualties in a variety of scenarios unique to the battlefield. An evaluation of the medic predeployment training paradigm is important and will help to understand its current state and identify areas for improvement. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to perform a focused assessment of Army medic predeployment training to identify patterns that might inform future medic training. METHODS: A web-based survey was created using the Intelink.gov platform and sent by e-mail to Army medics who deployed since 2001. Medics were asked to reflect upon the predeployment training from their most recent deployment experience. There were multiple choice, Likert-type scale, and free-text response questions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: There were 254 respondents who met the study inclusion criteria. Most of the respondents had their clinical competency evaluated (68.5%, n = 174). Respondents reported several acute trauma, basic nursing, and battlefield medicine skills as being critical but also felt that many of these same skills would have benefited from additional predeployment training. Most of the respondents felt very or fully confident and prepared to provide combat casualty care (74.8%, n = 190 and 74.8%, n = 190). There were 64 respondents (25.2%) who reported feeling not at all, slightly, or moderately confident, and 54 (84.4%) of these respondents described in a free-text question wanting additional training before deployment. CONCLUSION: Respondents reported many skills as being critical to combat casualty care, but several of these skills would have benefited from additional predeployment training. Respondents with more deployment experience or completion of more predeployment training reported feeling more confident and prepared to provide combat casualty care. A common sentiment was the desire for more training of any form before deployment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level IV.