Battlefield pain management: A view of 17 years in Israel Defense Forces

Factors that influence the administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) to trauma patients in prehospital settings: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

In the UK there are around 5400 deaths annually from injury. Tranexamic acid (TXA) prevents bleeding and has been shown to reduce trauma mortality. However, only 5% of UK major trauma patients who are at risk of haemorrhage receive prehospital TXA. This review aims to examine the evidence regarding factors influencing the prehospital administration of TXA to trauma patients.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

AMED, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2010 to 2020; searches were updated in June 2022.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov and OpenGrey were also searched and forward and backwards citation chasing performed.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All primary research reporting factors influencing TXA administration to trauma patients in the prehospital setting was included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers performed the selection process, quality assessment and data extraction. Data were tabulated, grouped by setting and influencing factor and synthesised narratively.

RESULTS

Twenty papers (278 249 participants in total) were included in the final synthesis; 13 papers from civilian and 7 from military settings. Thirteen studies were rated as 'moderate' using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. Several common factors were identified: knowledge and skills; consequences and social influences; injury type (severity, injury site and mechanism); protocols; resources; priorities; patient age; patient sex.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights an absence of high-quality research. Preliminary evidence suggests a host of system and individual-level factors that may be important in determining whether TXA is administered to trauma patients in the prehospital setting.

FUNDING AND REGISTRATION

This review was supported by Research Capability Funding from the South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust and the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020162943.

A global perspective on gun violence injuries

INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS

Civilian gunshot violence is a growing public health issue on a global scale. Treatment of patients with gunshot injuries is based on algorithms derived from military studies, but the distinct differences in weaponry, energy of injury, timing and type of care, and environment translate to a gap in knowledge. With a focus on non-accidental gunshot trauma and excluding suicide etiologies, we propose to build a collaborative research group to address important questions focused on best practices for gunshot injury patients.

PRE-HOSPITAL CARE

There are important differences in the care of gunshot victims across the globe; some countries provide advanced interventions in the field and others deliver basic support until transport to a higher level of care in hospital. Some simple interventions include the use of extremity tourniquets and intravenous fluid support; others to consider are tranexamic acid, whole blood, and hemostatic agents.

ACUTE TREATMENT

Control of exsanguinating hemorrhage is a key priority for gunshot injuries. Military doctrine has evolved to prioritize exsanguination over airway or breathing as the critical first step. The X-ABC protocol focuses on exsanguinating hemorrhage, then standard evaluation of Airway, Breathing and Circulation (ABCs) to enhance survival in trauma patients. The timing of bony stabilization, in terms of damage-control vs definitive care, needs further study in this population, as does use of antibiotics for bony extremity injuries. Finally, recognition of the mental health effects of gun trauma, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorders, substance abuse and depression is important in advocating for prevention such as implementation of social support and specific interventions.

DEFINITIVE CARE

The need for abdominal closure after exploratory laparotomy, definitive fracture treatment, and other treatment all contribute to length of stay for gunshot injured patients. Optimizing stabilization allows earlier mobilization and decreases nosocomial complications. Nerve injuries are often a source of long-term disability and their evaluation and treatment require further investigation.

RESOURCES AND ETHICS

There are growing numbers of mass-casualty gunshot events, which require consideration of how to organize and use resources for treatment, including staff, operating room access, blood products, and order of treatment. Drills and planning for incident command hierarchy and communication are key to optimizing resource utilization. The ethics of choosing treatment priorities and resources are important considerations as well.

The Influence of Gender Bias: Is Pain Management in the Field Affected by Health Care Provider's Gender?

INTRODUCTION

Appropriate pain management indicates the quality of casualty care in trauma. Gender bias in pain management focused so far on the patient. Studies regarding provider gender are scarce and have conflicting results, especially in the military and prehospital settings.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of health care providers' gender on pain management approaches among prehospital trauma casualties treated by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) medical teams.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all trauma casualties treated by IDF senior providers from 2015-2020. Casualties with a pain score of zero, age under 18 years, or treated with endotracheal intubation were excluded. Groups were divided according to the senior provider's gender: only females, males, or both female and male. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess the odds ratio of receiving an analgesic, depending on the presence of a female senior provider, adjusting for potential confounders. A subgroup analysis was performed for "delta-pain," defined as the difference in pain score during treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 976 casualties were included, of whom 835 (85.6%) were male. Mean pain scores (SD) for the female only, male only, and both genders providers were 6.4 (SD = 2.9), 6.4 (SD = 3.0), and 6.9 (SD = 2.8), respectively (P = .257). There was no significant difference between females, males, or both female and male groups in analgesic treatment, overall and per specific agent. This remained true also in the multivariate model. Delta-pain difference between groups was also not significant. Less than two-thirds of casualties in this study were treated for pain among all study groups.

CONCLUSION

This study found no association between IDF Medical Corps providers' gender and pain management in prehospital trauma patients. Further studies regarding disparities in acute pain treatment are advised.

Is Prehospital Ketamine Associated With a Change in the Prognosis of PTSD?

INTRODUCTION

Ketamine is an alternative to opioids for prehospital analgesia following serious combat injury. Limited research has examined prehospital ketamine use, associated injuries including traumatic brain injury (TBI) and PTSD outcomes following serious combat injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We randomly selected 398 U.S. service members from the Expeditionary Medical Encounter Database who sustained serious combat injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan, 2010-2013. Of these 398 patients, 213 individuals had charted prehospital medications. Clinicians reviewed casualty records to identify injuries and all medications administered. Outcomes were PTSD diagnoses during the first year and during the first 2 years postinjury extracted from military health databases. We compared PTSD outcomes for patients treated with either (a) prehospital ketamine (with or without opioids) or (b) prehospital opioids (without ketamine).

RESULTS

Fewer patients received prehospital ketamine (26%, 56 of 213) than only prehospital opioids (69%, 146 of 213) (5%, 11 of 213 received neither ketamine nor opioids). The ketamine group averaged significantly more moderate-to-serious injuries, particularly lower limb amputations and open wounds, compared with the opioid group (Ps < .05). Multivariable regressions showed a significant interaction between prehospital ketamine (versus opioids) and TBI on first-year PTSD (P = .027). In subsequent comparisons, the prehospital ketamine group had significantly lower odds of first-year PTSD (OR = 0.08, 95% CI [0.01, 0.71], P = .023) versus prehospital opioids only among patients who did not sustain TBI. We also report results from separate analyses of PTSD outcomes among patients treated with different prehospital opioids only (without ketamine), either morphine or fentanyl.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results showed that patients treated with prehospital ketamine had significantly lower odds of PTSD during the first year postinjury only among patients who did not sustain TBI. These findings can inform combat casualty care guidelines for use of prehospital ketamine and opioid analgesics following serious combat injury.

Trauma Prehospital Hypothermia Prevention and Treatment: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Hypothermia in trauma patients causes increased morbidity and mortality. Swift recognition and treatment are important to prevent any further heat loss. In addition, patient discomfort from cold decreases satisfaction with care. The administration of active and passive rewarming measures is important in the prevention and treatment of hypothermia, but their use in prehospital trauma patients in Portugal has not been previously reported.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of hypothermia, the impact of rewarming measures, and the management of the discomfort caused by cold.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study conducted in Immediate Life Support Ambulances in Portugal between March 1, 2019, and April 30, 2020.

RESULTS

This study included records of 586 trauma patients; of whom, 66.2% were men. Cranioencephalic trauma was the most common trauma observed, followed by lower limb and thoracic traumas. Mean body temperature increased 0.12 °C between the first and last assessments (p < .05). Most patients experiencing a level of discomfort of 5 or more on a 0-10 scale reported improvement (from 17.2% to 2.4% after nurses' intervention). Warmed intravenous fluids proved to be effective (p < .05) in increasing body temperature, and passive rewarming measures were effective in preventing hypothermia.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypothermia management has to consider the initial temperature, the season, the available rewarming measures, and the objectives to be achieved. The optimization of resources for the monitoring and treatment of hypothermia should be a priority in prehospital assistance. The implementation of rewarming measures improves patients' outcomes and decreases the discomfort caused by cold in prehospital care.

Pain management for casualties receiving lifesaving interventions in the prehospital scenario: Raising awareness of our human nature

BACKGROUND

Lifesaving interventions (LSIs) are the hallmark of medical care in trauma casualties, reducing mortality and morbidity. Analgesia is another essential treatment, which has been shown to improve outcomes and decrease long-term complications. However, oligoanalgesia is common, and information regarding its relation to the performance of LSIs is scarce. The purpose of this study was to assess the relation between the performance of LSIs and analgesia administration in the prehospital environment.

METHODS

A retrospective database-based study was performed, including all trauma casualties treated by Israeli Defense Forces physicians and paramedics during 2006 to 2017 and admitted to hospitals participating in the Israeli National Trauma Registry. Included LSIs were tourniquet application, administration of tranexamic acid and freeze-dried plasma, and administration of chest decompression. Casualties treated with endotracheal intubation or cricothyroidotomy were excluded.

RESULTS

In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, LSIs were associated with prehospital analgesia administration (odds ratio [OR], 3.59; confidence interval [CI], 2.56-5.08; p < 0.001). When assessing for the different LSIs, tourniquet application (OR, 2.83; CI, 1.89-4.27; p < 0.001) and tranexamic acid administration (OR, 4.307; CI, 2.42-8.04; p < 0.001) were associated with prehospital analgesia administration.

CONCLUSION

A positive association exists between performance of LSIs and administration of analgesia in the prehospital environment. Possible explanations may include cognitive and emotional biases affecting casualty care providers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective study, level IV.

Comparing the Effect of Gabapentin, Ketamine, Dexmedetomidine, and Entonox on Pain Control in Burn Wound Dressing

This study aimed to evaluate differences in the experience of pain, nausea, and vomiting, as well as the hemodynamic parameters including heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) in burn patients across four pain treatment groups-i.e., gabapentin, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, and entonox. In a single blinded randomized comparative study, 25 burn patients with second- or third-degree burns between 20% and 50% of their body surface were assigned to different treatment groups by using block randomization, while keeping the investigator blind to the size of the block. We recorded demographics, the hemodynamics, adverse effects, and pain levels before the treatment and again 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, 240, and 360 minutes postadministration of pain medication (after-treatment). Gabapentin ketamine, dexmedetomidine, and entonox had significant effects in treatment of pain in burn patients. Entonox had the best analgesic effect with the least adverse effects and hemodynamic changes. Gabapentin also had good pain management effects; however, it showed less desirable effects on hemodynamic variables. Entonox caused the least amount of hemodynamic changes and the least adverse reactions, but since the medication is delivered by a facemask it limited its application with our patients. Gabapentin offered good benefits but caused a gradual drop in BP and HR and had some unfavorable reactions. However, since it is administered orally and often is cheaper, it could be considered as the drug of choice.

Non-pharmacological interventions for acute pain management in adult trauma victims: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to map non-pharmacological interventions to reduce acute pain in adult trauma victims.

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain is a consequence of a pathological or traumatic event, and a result of invasive or non-invasive health care procedures. Acute trauma pain, as well as its treatment, is one of the least-studied areas of acute pain. Although non-pharmacological interventions are responsible for pain relief among a significant number of patients, only a small percentage of patients receive non-pharmacological interventions.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered all studies conducted on adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in pre-hospital emergency care, emergency rooms, and trauma-center settings. Studies were considered if they focused on non-pharmacological interventions designed to reduce acute pain, and were implemented and evaluated by health professionals. Non-pharmacological interventions of any type, duration, frequency, and intensity were considered.

METHODS

A comprehensive search strategy across 11 bibliometric databases and gray literature sources was developed. Full texts of selected citations were assessed in detail for eligibility by two independent reviewers. No other relevant studies were identified by searching the references of the included articles. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers using an instrument previously developed, and those reviewers were later responsible for its validation. Findings were then extracted directly into tables that are accompanied by a narrative summary to show how they relate to the objectives of the review conducted.

RESULTS

This scoping review included nine studies: two retrospective cohort studies, five randomized controlled trials, one case report, and one literature review for five different countries. Non-pharmacological interventions identified and administered to trauma victims in pre-hospital settings, emergency services, and trauma centers were as follows: acupressure, auricular acupressure, auricular acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, repositioning, use of pressure relief devices, massage, heat therapy, music therapy, relaxation therapy, immobilization, ice therapy, compression, elevation, and bandage. Non-pharmacological interventions were mainly developed by nurses, physicians, and paramedics. They were, in most studies, poorly described in terms of their efficacy and were mostly reported in minor traumas, such as simple fractures or small wounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is no consensus for the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of acute trauma pain. Their application is primarily used for minor traumas, and their potential for the treatment of major traumas is yet unknown. No studies on the use of non-pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing the impact of traumatic adverse environments were identified. Further investigation on the effects of these interventions should be encouraged so that robust decisions and recommendations can be made.

Nasal nalbuphine analgesia in prehospital trauma managed by first-responder personnel on ski slopes in Switzerland: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the major symptoms complained about by patients in the prehospital setting, especially in the case of trauma. When there is mountainous topography, as in Switzerland, there may be a time delay between injury and arrival of professional rescuers, in particular on ski slopes. Administration of a safe opioid by first responders may improve overall treatment. We therefore assessed administration of nasal nalbuphine as an analgesic treatment for trauma patients in Switzerland.

METHODS

This observational cohort study examined 267 patients who were treated with nasal nalbuphine by first responders in six ski resorts in Switzerland. All first responders were instructed to begin treatment by assessing the feasibility of using nalbuphine to treat pain in the patient. A treatment algorithm was developed and distributed to assure that nalbuphine was only administered following a strict protocol. Data regarding pain scores and pain reduction after administration of nalbuphine were collected on-site. Refills were handed out to the first responders with the return of each completed questionnaire.

RESULTS

Nalbuphine provided effective pain relief, with the median level of pain on the numeric rating scale for pain reduced by 3 units on average, from 8 points (p < 0.001). The multivariate regression model showed that pain reduction was more pronounced in patients with higher initial pain levels. Nalbuphine was more effective in adolsecents than in patients aged 20 to 60 years (p = 0.006). No major side effects were observed.

CONCLUSION

Nasal administration of nalbuphine by first responders is a presumably safe and effective noninvasive pain management strategy for acutely injured patients in the prehospital setting. This may be an alternative, especially in the case of severe pain and prolonged time between arrival of the first responders and arrival of EMS/HEMS personnel on scene.

Ketamine Administration in Prehospital Combat Injured Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: A 10-Year Report of Survival

Background The Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) guidelines recommend ketamine as the primary battlefield analgesic in the setting of moderate-to-severe pain and hemodynamic compromise. However, despite recent studies failing to support the association between ketamine and worse outcomes in head trauma, TCCC guidelines state that ketamine may worsen severe traumatic brain injury. We compared mortality outcomes following head trauma sustained in a combat setting between ketamine recipients and non-recipients. Methods This is a secondary analysis of previously published data in the Department of Defense Trauma Registry from January 2007 to August 2016. We isolated patients with an abbreviated injury scale of 3 or greater for the head body region. We compared mortality between prehospital ketamine recipients and non-recipients. Results Our initial search yielded 28,222 patients, of which 4,183 met the inclusion criteria: 209 were ketamine-recipients and 3,974 were non-recipients. The ketamine group had a higher percentage injured by explosives (59.81% vs. 53.57%, p<0.001) and gunshot wounds (28.71% vs. 22.07%, p<0.001) and were more frequently located in Afghanistan (100% vs. 68.0%, p<0.001). The ketamine group had higher rates of tourniquet application (24.4% vs. 8.5%, p<0.001) and had lower survival proportion (75.1% alive vs. 83.0%, p=0.003). All differences were significant. On univariable analysis, the ketamine group had worse odds of survival with (OR: 0.62; 95%CI: 0.45-0.86). When controlling for the presence of an airway intervention and mechanism of injury, the finding was non-significant (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.76-1.55). Conclusions In our prehospital combat study, after controlling for confounders, we found no association between administration of prehospital ketamine and worse survival outcomes for casualties with head injuries. However, despite the lack of difference in overall survival noted, those who received ketamine and died had a higher risk ratio for time to death.

Non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in adult victims of trauma: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to map non-pharmacological interventions for reducing acute pain for adult victims of trauma.

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain, as a consequence of either a pathological or traumatic event or even due to invasive and non-invasive healthcare procedures, is highly prevalent in critically ill patients. However, specific acute pain as a direct consequence of trauma is one of the least studied areas of acute pain.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review will consider studies on adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in prehospital emergency care, emergency departments and trauma centers. All studies that focus on non-pharmacological interventions designed to reduce acute pain, implemented and evaluated by health professionals in any form, duration, frequency and intensity, will be considered.

METHODS

An initial search of PubMed and CINAHL will be undertaken, followed by a second search for published and unpublished studies from 2000 to the present in major healthcare related electronic databases. Studies in English, French, Spanish and Portuguese will be included. Data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers in tabular form and include details about the interventions, populations, study methods and outcomes of interest. A narrative synthesis will accompany the results and will describe how they relate to the review objectives.

Opioid analgesia on the battlefield: a retrospective review of data from Operation HERRICK

Background

Acute pain secondary to trauma is commonly encountered on the battlefield. The use of morphine to manage pain during combat has been well established since the 19th century. Despite this, there is relatively little research on analgesia use in this environment. This study aims to review the use and complications of morphine and other opioids during Operation HERRICK.

Methods

A database search of the Joint Theatre Trauma Registry was completed looking for all incidences of morphine, fentanyl or naloxone use from February 2007 to September 2014. Microsoft Excel was used to analyse the results.

Results

Opioid analgesia was administered to 5801 casualties. Morphine was administered 6742 times to 3808 patients. Fentanyl was administered 9672 times to 4318 patients. Naloxone was used 18 times on 14 patients, giving a complication rate of 0.24%. Opioid doses prior to naloxone administration range from 0 to 72 mg of morphine and from 0 to 100 mcg of fentanyl. Four casualties (two local civilians and two coalition forces) received naloxone despite no recorded opioids being administered. Opium abuse was prevalent among the local population in Afghanistan, and this could explain the rationale behind two local national casualties receiving naloxone without any documented opioids being given.

Conclusion

The use of opioids in a battlefield environment is extremely safe. Complication rates are similar to previously published data which is reassuring. The efficacy of different opioids was not covered by this study, and further analysis is required, particularly following the introduction of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate and the availability of novel non-opioid analgesics.