Emergency thoracotomy and the military surgeon

Emergency Resuscitative Thoracotomy in the Combat or Operational Environment

Resuscitative thoracotomy has been extensively described in the civilian trauma literature and has a high mortality rate, due largely to the nature of the injuries leading to arrest. The survival rates are generally highest (10-30%) for penetrating truncal injuries and patients who arrive with vital signs and proceed to arrest or who have impending arrest. They are significantly lower (less than 5%) for blunt trauma victims, particularly those who arrest in the field or during transport (1% or less). In addition, the likelihood of survival with intact neurologic function is significantly lower than the overall survival rates, particularly for blunt trauma victims and for prehospital arrest.

Battlefield conditions: different environment but the same duty of care

Using an interpretative research approach to ethical and legal literature, it is argued that nursing in the battlefield is distinctly different to civilian nursing, even in an emergency, and that the environment is so different that a duty of care owed by military nurses to wounded soldiers should not apply. Such distinct differences in wartime can override normal peacetime professional ethics to the extent that the duty of care owed by military nurses to their patients on the battlefield should not exist. It is also argued that as military nurses have legal and professional obligations to care for wounded soldiers on the battlefield, this obligation conflicts with following military orders, causing a dual loyalty conflict. This is because soldiers are part of the 'fighting force' and must be fit to fight and win the battle. This makes them more of a commodity rather than individual persons with distinct health care needs.

Damage control surgery and casualty evacuation: techniques for surgeons, lessons for military medical planners

Damage Control Surgery (DCS) is a three-phase team-based approach to maximal injury penetrating abdominal trauma. In Phase I, the hypothermic, coagulopathic, acidotic, hypotensive casualty undergoes a proactively planned one-hour time limited laparotomy by an appropriately trained surgical trauma team. In phase II physiological stabilization takes place in the Intensive Care Unit. In phase III--definitive repair occurs. DCS is extremely resource intensive but will save lives on the battlefield. A military DCS patient will perioperatively require fourteen units of blood and seven units of fresh frozen plasma--half the blood stock of a light-scaled FST. Two DCS patients will in one day, exhaust this FSTs oxygen supply. We know that hypothermic patients with an iliac vascular injury (initial core temp < 34 degrees C) suffer four-fold increases in their mortality, yet we cannot heat our tents above 20 degrees C during a mild British winter. Our primary casualty retrieval is excessively slow. A simple casevac request has to go to too much 'middle-management' before a flight decision is made. In Vietnam, wounded soldiers arrived in hospital within twenty-five minutes of injury. In Iraq in 2005, that figure is over one hundred and ten minutes. We use support or anti-tank helicopters that are re-roled on an adhoc basis for the critical care and transport of our sickest patients. We still do not have a dedicated all-weather military helicopter evacuation fleet despite significant evidence that intensive care unit level military evacuation is safe and eminently achievable in both in the primary and secondary care setting. Should we not be asking why?