The Golden Hour of Casualty Care: Rapid Handoff to Surgical Team is Associated With Improved Survival in War-injured US Service Members.

OBJECTIVE: To examine time from injury to initiation of surgical care and association with survival in US military casualties. BACKGROUND: Although the advantage of trauma care within the "golden hour" after an injury is generally accepted, evidence is scarce. METHODS: This retrospective, population-based cohort study included US military casualties injured in Afghanistan and Iraq, January 2007 to December 2015, alive at initial request for evacuation with maximum abbreviated injury scale scores ≥2 and documented 30-day survival status after injury. Interventions: (1) handoff alive to the surgical team, and (2) initiation of first surgery were analyzed as time-dependent covariates (elapsed time from injury) using sequential Cox proportional hazards regression to assess how intervention timing might affect mortality. Covariates included age, injury year, and injury severity. RESULTS: Among 5269 patients (median age, 24 years; 97% males; and 68% battle-injured), 728 died within 30 days of injury, 68% within 1 hour, and 90% within 4 hours. Only handoffs within 1 hour of injury and the resultant timely initiation of emergency surgery (adjusted also for prior advanced resuscitative interventions) were significantly associated with reduced 24-hour mortality compared with more delayed surgical care (adjusted hazard ratios: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.14-0.82; P = 0.02; and 0.40; 95% CI: 0.20-0.81; P = 0.01, respectively). In-hospital waits for surgery (mean: 1.1 hours; 95% CI; 1.0-1.2) scarcely contributed ( P = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid handoff to the surgical team within 1 hour of injury may reduce mortality by 66% in US military casualties. In the subgroup of casualties with indications for emergency surgery, rapid handoff with timely surgical intervention may reduce mortality by 60%. To inform future research and trauma system planning, findings are pivotal.

Joint Trauma System, Defense Committee on Trauma, and Armed Services Blood Program consensus statement on whole blood.

Hemorrhage is the most common mechanism of death in battlefield casualties with potentially survivable injuries. There is evidence that early blood product transfusion saves lives among combat casualties. When compared to component therapy, fresh whole blood transfusion improves outcomes in military settings. Cold-stored whole blood also improves outcomes in trauma patients. Whole blood has the advantage of providing red cells, plasma, and platelets together in a single unit, which simplifies and speeds the process of resuscitation, particularly in austere environments. The Joint Trauma System, the Defense Committee on Trauma, and the Armed Services Blood Program endorse the following: (1) whole blood should be used to treat hemorrhagic shock; (2) low-titer group O whole blood is the resuscitation product of choice for the treatment of hemorrhagic shock for all casualties at all roles of care; (3) whole blood should be available within 30 min of casualty wounding, on all medical evacuation platforms, and at all resuscitation and surgical team locations; (4) when whole blood is not available, component therapy should be available within 30 min of casualty wounding; (5) all prehospital medical providers should be trained and logistically supported to screen donors, collect fresh whole blood from designated donors, transfuse blood products, recognize and treat transfusion reactions, and complete the minimum documentation requirements; (6) all deploying military personnel should undergo walking blood bank prescreen laboratory testing for transfusion transmitted disease immediately prior to deployment. Those who are blood group O should undergo anti-A/anti-B antibody titer testing.

Association of Prehospital Blood Product Transfusion During Medical Evacuation of Combat Casualties in Afghanistan With Acute and 30-Day Survival.

IMPORTANCE: Prehospital blood product transfusion in trauma care remains controversial due to poor-quality evidence and cost. Sequential expansion of blood transfusion capability after 2012 to deployed military medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) units enabled a concurrent cohort study to focus on the timing as well as the location of the initial transfusion. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of prehospital transfusion and time to initial transfusion with injury survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of US military combat casualties in Afghanistan between April 1, 2012, and August 7, 2015. Eligible patients were rescued alive by MEDEVAC from point of injury with either (1) a traumatic limb amputation at or above the knee or elbow or (2) shock defined as a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg or a heart rate greater than 120 beats per minute. EXPOSURES: Initiation of prehospital transfusion and time from MEDEVAC rescue to first transfusion, regardless of location (ie, prior to or during hospitalization). Transfusion recipients were compared with nonrecipients (unexposed) for whom transfusion was delayed or not given. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mortality at 24 hours and 30 days after MEDEVAC rescue were coprimary outcomes. To balance injury severity, nonrecipients of prehospital transfusion were frequency matched to recipients by mechanism of injury, prehospital shock, severity of limb amputation, head injury, and torso hemorrhage. Cox regression was stratified by matched groups and also adjusted for age, injury year, transport team, tourniquet use, and time to MEDEVAC rescue. RESULTS: Of 502 patients (median age, 25 years [interquartile range, 22 to 29 years]; 98% male), 3 of 55 prehospital transfusion recipients (5%) and 85 of 447 nonrecipients (19%) died within 24 hours of MEDEVAC rescue (between-group difference, -14% [95% CI, -21% to -6%]; P = .01). By day 30, 6 recipients (11%) and 102 nonrecipients (23%) died (between-group difference, -12% [95% CI, -21% to -2%]; P = .04). For the 386 patients without missing covariate data among the 400 patients within the matched groups, the adjusted hazard ratio for mortality associated with prehospital transfusion was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.84, P = .02) over 24 hours (3 deaths among 54 recipients vs 67 deaths among 332 matched nonrecipients) and 0.39 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.92, P = .03) over 30 days (6 vs 76 deaths, respectively). Time to initial transfusion, regardless of location (prehospital or during hospitalization), was associated with reduced 24-hour mortality only up to 15 minutes after MEDEVAC rescue (median, 36 minutes after injury; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.73], P = .02; there were 2 deaths among 62 recipients vs 68 deaths among 324 delayed transfusion recipients or nonrecipients). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among medically evacuated US military combat causalities in Afghanistan, blood product transfusion prehospital or within minutes of injury was associated with greater 24-hour and 30-day survival than delayed transfusion or no transfusion. The findings support prehospital transfusion in this setting.

Junctional Hemorrhage Control for Tactical Combat Casualty Care.

During historic, as well as more recent, conflicts, most combat casualties who die from their injuries do so in the prehospital setting. Although many of the injuries incurred by these casualties are nonsurvivable, a number of injuries are still potentially survivable. Of those injuries that are potentially survivable, the majority are truncal, junctional, and extremity hemorrhage. Novel and effective approaches directed toward prehospital hemorrhage control have emerged in recent years, some of which can prove useful in the management of junctional hemorrhage whether in a military or civilian setting. An initial comprehensive review of junctional tourniquets was conducted by the Department of Defense Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care in 2013. The objective of this article is to provide an updated review of junctional hemorrhage control efforts and devices as they apply primarily to military prehospital trauma management and Tactical Combat Casualty Care and to prompt further consideration and application of these devices in nonmilitary prehospital, austere, and wilderness environments. Four junctional tourniquets are currently cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for junctional hemorrhage control, and 1 junctional tourniquet is also FDA-cleared for pelvic stabilization. As junctional hemorrhage control efforts progress, scientists need to continue to conduct research and clinicians need to continue to monitor the performance of junctional tourniquets, especially in conjunction with morbidity and mortality outcomes, for both military and civilian trauma patients.

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.

Performance of Junctional Tourniquets in Normal Human Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Inguinal bleeding is a common and preventable cause of death on the battlefield. Four FDA-cleared junctional tourniquets (Combat Ready Clamp [CRoC], Abdominal Aortic and Junctional Tourniquet [AAJT], Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool [JETT], and SAM Junctional Tourniquet [SJT]) were assessed in a laboratory on volunteers in order to describe differential performance of models. OBJECTIVE: To examine safety and effectiveness of junctional tourniquets in order to inform the discussions of device selection for possible fielding to military units. METHODS: The experiment measured safety and effectiveness parameters over timed, repeated applications. Lower extremity pulses were measured in 10 volunteers before and after junctional tourniquet application aimed at stopping the distal pulse assessed by Doppler auscultation. Safety was determined as the absence of adverse events during the time of application. RESULTS: The CRoC, SJT, and JETT were most effective; their effectiveness did not differ (p > 0.05). All tourniquets were applied safely and successfully in at least one instance each, but pain varied by model. Subjects assessed the CRoC as most tolerable. The CRoC and SJT were the fastest to apply. Users ranked CRoC and SJT equally as performing best. CONCLUSION: The CRoC and SJT were the best-performing junctional tourniquets using this model.

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 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.

Military Medicine's Value to US Health Care and Public Health: Bringing Battlefield Lessons Home.

Importance: Military medicine in the US was established to treat wounded and ill service members and to protect the health and well-being of our military forces at home and abroad. To accomplish these tasks, it has developed the capacity to rapidly adapt to the changing nature of war and emerging health threats; throughout our nation's history, innovations developed by military health professionals have been quickly adopted by civilian medicine and public health for the benefit of patients in the US and around the world. Observations: From the historical record and published studies, we cite notable examples of how military medicine has advanced civilian health care and public health. We also describe how military medicine research and development differs from that done in the civilian world. During the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, military medicine's focused approach to performance improvement and requirements-driven research cut the case fatality rate from severe battlefield wounds in half, to the lowest level in the history of warfare. Conclusions and Relevance: Although innovations developed by military medicine regularly inform and improve civilian health care and public health, the architects of these advances and the methods they use are often overlooked. Enhanced communication and cooperation between our nation's military and civilian health systems would promote reciprocal learning, accelerate collaborative research, and strengthen our nation's capacity to meet a growing array of health and geopolitical threats.

The Battalion Aid Station-The Forgotten Frontier of the Army Health System During the Global War on Terrorism.

BACKGROUND: The battalion aid station (BAS) has historically served as the first stop during which combat casualties would receive care beyond a combat medic. Since the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, many combat casualties have bypassed the BAS for treatment facilities capable of surgery. We describe the care provided at these treatment facilities during 2007-2020. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of previously described data from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. We included encounters with the documentation of an assessment or intervention at a BAS or forward operating base from January 1, 2007 to March 17, 2020. We utilized descriptive statistics to characterize these encounters. RESULTS: There were 28,950 encounters in our original dataset, of which 3.1% (884) had the documentation of a prehospital visit to a BAS. The BAS cohort was older (25 vs. 24, P < .001) The non-BAS cohort saw a larger portion of pediatric (<18 years) patients (10.7% vs. 5.7%, P < .001). A higher proportion of BAS patients had nonbattle injuries (40% vs. 20.7%, P < .001). The mean injury severity score was higher in the non-BAS cohort (9 vs. 5, P < .001). A higher proportion of the non-BAS cohort had more serious extremity injuries (25.1% vs. 18.4%, P < .001), although the non-BAS cohort had a trend toward serious injuries to the abdomen (P = .051) and thorax (P = .069). There was no difference in survival. CONCLUSIONS: The BAS was once a critical point in casualty evacuation and treatment. Within our dataset, the overall number of encounters that involved a stop at a BAS facility was low. For both the asymmetric battlefield and multidomain operations/large-scale combat operations, the current model would benefit from a more robust capability to include storage of blood, ventilators, and monitoring and hold patients for an undetermined amount of time.

A Review of 75th Ranger Regiment Battle-Injured Fatalities Incurred During Combat Operations From 2001 to 2021.

INTRODUCTION: The 75th Ranger Regiment is an elite U.S. military special operations unit that conducted over 20 years of sustained combat operations. The Regiment has a history of providing novel and cutting-edge prehospital trauma care, advancing and translating medical initiatives, and documenting and reporting casualty care performance improvement efforts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective case fatality rate (CFR) review, mortality review, and descriptive analysis of fatalities were conducted for battle-injured personnel assigned or attached to the 75th Ranger Regiment from 2001 to 2021 during combat operations primarily in Afghanistan and Iraq. Fatalities were evaluated for population characteristics, cause of death, mechanism of death, injury severity, injury survivability, and death preventability. RESULTS: A total of 813 battle injury casualties, including 62 fatalities, were incurred over 20 years and 1 month of continuous combat operations. The Regiment maintained a zero rate of prehospital preventable combat death. Additionally, no fatalities had a mechanism of death because of isolated extremity hemorrhage, tension pneumothorax, or airway obstruction. When comparing the CFR of the Regiment to the U.S. military population as a whole, the Regiment had a significantly greater reduction in the cumulative CFR as measured by the difference in average annual percentage change. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation and analysis of casualties and care, mortality and casualty reviews, and other performance improvement efforts can guide combatant commanders, medical directors, and fighting forces to reduce preventable combat deaths and the CFR. Early hemorrhage control, blood product resuscitation, and other lifesaving interventions should be established and maintained as a standard prehospital practice to mitigate fatalities with potentially survivable injuries.

United States Military Fatalities During Operation Inherent Resolve and Operation Freedom's Sentinel.

BACKGROUND: Military operations provide a unified action and strategic approach to achieve national goals and objectives. Mortality reviews from military operations can guide injury prevention and casualty care efforts. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on all U.S. military fatalities from Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) in Iraq (2014-2021) and Operation Freedom's Sentinel (OFS) in Afghanistan (2015-2021). Data were obtained from autopsy reports and other existing records. Fatalities were evaluated for population characteristics; manner, cause, and location of death; and underlying atherosclerosis. Non-suicide trauma fatalities were also evaluated for injury severity, mechanism of death, injury survivability, death preventability, and opportunities for improvement. RESULTS: Of 213 U.S. military fatalities (median age, 29 years; male, 93.0%; prehospital, 89.2%), 49.8% were from OIR, and 50.2% were from OFS. More OIR fatalities were Reserve and National Guard forces (OIR 22.6%; OFS 5.6%), conventional forces (OIR 82.1%; OFS 65.4%), and support personnel (OIR 61.3%; OFS 33.6%). More OIR fatalities also resulted from disease and non-battle injury (OIR 83.0%; OFS 28.0%). The leading cause of death was injury (OIR 81.1%; OFS 98.1%). Manner of death differed as more homicides (OIR 18.9%; OFS 72.9%) were seen in OFS, and more deaths from natural causes (OIR 18.9%; OFS 1.9%) and suicides (OIR 29.2%; OFS 6.5%) were seen in OIR. The prevalence of underlying atherosclerosis was 14.2% in OIR and 18.7% in OFS. Of 146 non-suicide trauma fatalities, most multiple/blunt force injury deaths (62.2%) occurred in OIR, and most blast injury deaths (77.8%) and gunshot wound deaths (76.6%) occurred in OFS. The leading mechanism of death was catastrophic tissue destruction (80.8%). Most fatalities had non-survivable injuries (80.8%) and non-preventable deaths (97.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive mortality reviews should routinely be conducted for all military operation deaths. Understanding death from both injury and disease can guide preemptive and responsive efforts to reduce death among military forces.

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.

Nonfatal Injuries From Falls Among U.S. Military Personnel Deployed for Combat Operations, 2001-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Falls are a leading mechanism of injury. Hospitalization and outpatient clinic visits due to fall injury are frequently reported among both deployed and non-deployed U.S. Military personnel. Falls have been previously identified as a leading injury second only to sports and exercise as a cause for non-battle air evacuations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed the Department of Defense Trauma Registry fall injury data from September 11, 2001 to December 31, 2018. Deployed U.S. Military personnel with fall listed as one of their mechanisms of injury were included for analysis. RESULTS: Of 31,791 injured U.S. Military personnel captured by the Department of Defense Trauma Registry within the study time frame, a total of 3,101 (9.8%) incurred injuries from falls. Those who had fall injuries were primarily 21 to 30 years old (55.4%), male (93.1%), Army (75.6%), and enlisted personnel (56.9%). The proportion of casualties sustaining injuries from falls generally increased through the years of the study. Most fall injuries were classified as non-battle injury (91.9%). Falls accounted for 24.2% of non-battle injury hospital admissions with a median hospital stay of 2 days. More non-battle-related falls were reported in Iraq-centric military operations (62.7%); whereas more battle-related falls were reported in Afghanistan-centric military operations (58.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest analysis of deployed U.S. Military personnel injured by falls to date. Highlighted are preventive strategies to mitigate fall injury, reduce workforce attrition, and preserve combat mission capability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Epidemiologic.

Evidence-based principles of time, triage and treatment: Refining the initial medical response to massive casualty incidents.

BACKGROUND: The overall approach to massive casualty triage has changed little in the past 200 years. As the military and civilian organizations prepare for the possibility of future large-scale combat operations, terrorist attacks and natural disasters, potentially involving hundreds or even thousands of casualties, a modified approach is needed to conduct effective triage, initiate treatment, and save as many lives as possible. METHODS: Military experience and review of analyses from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry are combined to introduce new concepts in triage and initial casualty management. RESULTS: The classification of the scale of massive casualty (MASCAL) incidents, timeline of life-saving interventions, immediate first pass actions prior to formal triage decisions during the first hour after injury, simplification of triage decisions, and the understanding that ultra-MASCAL will primarily require casualty movement and survival needs with few prehospital life-saving medical interventions are discussed. CONCLUSION: Self aid, bystander, and first responder interventions are paramount and should be trained and planned extensively. Military and disaster planning should not only train these concepts, but should seek innovations to extend the timelines of effectiveness and to deliver novel capabilities within the timelines to the greatest extent possible.

Unit Collective Medical Training in the 75th Ranger Regiment.

The 75th Ranger Regiment's success with eliminating preventable death on the battlefield is innate to the execution of a continuous operational readiness training cycle that integrates individual and unit collective medical training. This is a tactical solution to a tactical problem that is solved by the entire unit, not just by medics. When a casualty occurs, the unit must immediately respond as a team to extract, treat, and evacuate the casualty while simultaneously completing the tactical mission. All in the unit must maintain first responder medical skills and medics must be highly proficient. Leaders must be prepared to integrate casualty management into any phase of the mission. Leaders must understand that (1) the first casualty can be anyone; (2) the first responder to a casualty can be anyone; (3) medical personnel manage casualty care; and (4) leaders have ownership and responsibility for all aspects of the mission. Foundational to training is a command-directed casualty response system which serves as a forcing function to ensure proficiency and mastery of the basics. Four programs have been developed to train individual and collective tasks that sustain the Ranger casualty response system: (1) Ranger First Responder, (2) Advanced Ranger First Responder, (3) Ranger Medic Assessment and Validation, and (4) Casualty Response Training for Ranger Leaders. Unit collective medical training incorporates tactical leader actions to facilitate the principles of casualty care. Tactical leader actions are paramount to execute a casualty response battle drill efficiently and effectively. Successful execution of this battle drill relies on a command-directed casualty response system and mastery of the basics through rehearsals, repetition, and conditioning.

Efficacy of point-of-injury combat antimicrobials.

BACKGROUND: Infection is a major complication associated with combat-related injuries. One strategy to decrease infections is immediate delivery of antimicrobials at or near the point-of-injury by the casualty or the first medical responder. The 75th Ranger Regiment systematically collects data on prehospital battlefield care, including antimicrobial administration. We review infectious complications and colonization rates associated with delivery of point-of-injury antimicrobial therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed casualty treatment data from the 75th Ranger Regiment prehospital trauma registry on patients injured between March 2003 and March 2010 and linked this to electronic medical record data to look for the presence of bacterial infection or colonization within 30 days of injury. Patient demographics, antimicrobial therapy, and outcomes were evaluated. Assessment of colonization included surveillance screening cultures performed for multidrug-resistant bacteria, including Acinetobacter baumannii and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, at US military hospitals in the combat zone, Germany, and stateside. RESULTS: Of 405 total casualties, 28 (6.9%) were infected with gram-negative bacteria, primarily A. baumannii. Of those who were not returned to duty or died near the time of injury, 28 of 211 (13.3%) were infected. The only identified risk factor for infection was higher military Injury Severity Score. Prehospital administration of antimicrobials to 113 of 405 casualties (27.9%), including 8 of the 28 infected casualties, did not affect infection or colonization rates. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited by population size, a significant difference in infection rates and multidrug-resistant pathogen colonization was not seen in those casualties who received single-dose broad-spectrum antimicrobials at the point-of-injury, confirming neither benefit nor harm. Overall adherence with initiating point-of-injury antimicrobials was low.

Autopsy-Determined Atherosclerosis in Elite US Military Special Operations Forces.

BACKGROUND: Autopsy studies of trauma fatalities have provided evidence for the pervasiveness of atherosclerosis in young and middle-aged adults. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of atherosclerosis in elite US military forces. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) fatalities from 2001 to 2020 who died from battle injuries. Autopsies were evaluated from Afghanistan- and Iraq-centric combat operations for evidence of coronary and/or aortic atherosclerosis and categorized as minimal (fatty streaking only), moderate (10-49% narrowing of ≥1 vessel), and severe (≥50% narrowing of ≥1 vessel). Prevalence of atherosclerosis was determined for the total population and by subgroup characteristics of age, sex, race/ethnicity, combat operation, service command, occupation, rank, cause of death, manner of death, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: From the total of 388 USSOCOM battle injury fatalities, 356 were included in the analysis. The mean age was 31 years (range, 19-57 years), and 98.6% were male. The overall prevalence of coronary and/or aortic atherosclerosis was 17.4%. The prevalence of coronary atherosclerosis alone was 13.8%. Coronary atherosclerosis was categorized as minimal in 1.1%, moderate in 7.6%, and severe in 5.1%. Of those with atherosclerosis, 24.2% were <30 years old, 88.7% were from enlisted ranks, and 95.2% had combatant occupations. When BMI could be calculated, 73.5% of fatalities with atherosclerosis had a BMI =25. CONCLUSIONS: Autopsy-determined atherosclerosis is prevalent in elite US military Special Operations Forces despite young age and positive lifestyle benefits of service in an elite military unit.

16 Years of Role 1 Trauma Care: A Descriptive Analysis of Casualties within the Prehospital Trauma Registry.

BACKGROUND: Most battlefield deaths occur in the prehospital setting prior to reaching surgical and hospital care. Described are casualties captured by the Joint Trauma System (JTS) in the Prehospital Trauma Registry (PHTR) module of the Department of Defense Trauma Registry (DoDTR), from inception through May 2019. METHODS: The JTS was queried for all PHTR encounters and associated data from inception (January 2003) through May 2019. The PHTR captures data on Role 1 prehospital care which encompasses treatment prior to arrival at a Role 2 with or without forward surgical team or Role 3 combat support hospital. Two unique patient identifiers were used to link DODTR outcome data to each PHTR encounter. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: We obtained a total of 1,357 encounters from the PHTR. Of these encounters, we successfully linked 52.2% (709/1357) to the DODTR for outcome data. Encounters spanned from 2003 to 2019, with most (69.5%) occurring from 2012 to 2014. Many casualties were in the 18-25 (25.5%) or 26-33 (27.0%) age ranges, male (99.2%), injured by explosive (47.1%) or firearm (34.8%), enlisted (44.8%), and US military conventional (24.1%) and special operations (23.9%) forces. Of those linked to the DODTR, demographics were similar, most casualties sustained battle injuries (87.1%), the majority of which survived (99.1%). CONCLUSIONS: We described 1,357 encounters within the PHTR, most of which were US casualties and casualties injured by explosives. This renewed effort by the JTS to capture more casualties for inclusion into the registry has nearly doubled the proportion of available encounters for analysis. This analysis lays the foundation for in-depth analyses targeting areas for optimizing Role 1 prehospital combat casualty care.

Case-control analysis of prehospital death and prolonged field care survival during recent US military combat operations.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of medical interventions administered during prolonged field care (PFC) is necessary to inform training and planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of Department of Defense Trauma Registry casualties with maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) score of 2 or greater and prehospital records during combat operations 2007 to 2015; US military nonsurvivors were linked to Armed Forces Medical Examiner System data. Medical interventions administered to survivors of 4 hours to 72 hours of PFC and nonsurvivors who died prehospital were compared by frequency-matching on mechanism (explosive, firearm, other), injury type (penetrating, blunt) and injured body regions with MAIS score of 3 or greater. Covariates for adjustment included age, sex, military Service, shock, Glasgow Coma Scale, transport team, MAIS and Injury Severity Score (ISS). Sensitivity analysis focused on US military subgroup with AIS/ISS assigned to nonsurvivors after autopsy. RESULTS: The total inception cohort included 16,202 casualties (5,269 US military, 10,809 non-US military), 64% Afghanistan, 36% Iraq. Of US military, 734 deaths occurred within 30 days, nearly 90% occurred within 4 hours of injury. There were 3,222 casualties (1,111 US military, 2,111 non-US military) documented for prehospital care and died prehospital (691) or survived 4 hours to 72 hours of PFC (2,531). Twenty-five percent (815/3,222) received advanced airway, 18% (583) ventilatory support, 9% (281) tourniquet. Twenty-three percent (725) received blood transfusions within 24 hours. Of the matched cohort (1,233 survivors, 490 nonsurvivors), differences were observed in care (survivors received more warming, intravenous fluids, sedation, mechanical ventilation, narcotics, antibiotics; nonsurvivors received more intubations, tourniquets, intraosseous fluids, cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Sensitivity analysis focused on US military (732 survivors, 379 nonsurvivors) showed no significant differences in prehospital interventions. Without autopsy information, the ISS of nonsurvivors significantly underestimated injury severity. CONCLUSION: Tourniquets, blood transfusion, airway, and ventilatory support are frequently required interventions for the seriously injured. Prolonged field care should direct resources, technology, and training to field technology for sustained resuscitation, airway, and breathing support in the austere environment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level III.