Analysis of Prehospital Documentation of Injury-Related Pain Assessment and Analgesic Administration on the Contemporary Battlefield

Patterns of Palliation: A Review of Casualties That Received Pain Management Before Reaching Role 2 in Afghanistan

INTRODUCTION

Battlefield pain management changed markedly during the first 20 years of the Global War on Terror. Morphine, long the mainstay of combat analgesia, diminished in favor of fentanyl and ketamine for military pain control, but the options are not hemodynamically or psychologically equivalent. Understanding patterns of prehospital analgesia may reveal further opportunities for combat casualty care improvement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using Department of Defense Trauma Registry data for the Afghanistan conflict from 2005 to 2018, we examined 2,402 records of prehospital analgesia administration to assess temporal trends in medication choice and proportions receiving analgesia, including subanalysis of a cohort screened for an indication with minimal contraindication for analgesia. We further employed frequency matching to explore the presence of disparities in analgesia by casualty affiliation.

RESULTS

Proportions of documented analgesia increased throughout the study period, from 0% in 2005 to 70.6% in 2018. Afghan casualties had the highest proportion of documented analgesia (53.0%), versus U.S. military (31.9%), civilian/other (23.3%), and non-U.S. military (19.3%). Fentanyl surpassed morphine in the frequency of administration in 2012. The median age of those receiving ketamine was higher (30 years) than those receiving fentanyl (26 years) or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (23 years). Among the frequency-matched subanalysis, the odds ratio for ketamine administration with Afghan casualties was 1.84 (95% CI, 1.30-2.61).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed heterogeneity of prehospital patient care across patient affiliation groups, suggesting possible opportunities for improvement toward an overall best practice system. General increase in documented prehospital pain management likely reflects efforts toward complete documentation, as well as improved options for analgesia. Current combat casualty care documentation does not include any standardized pain scale.

Effect of morphine administration after status epilepticus on epileptogenesis in rats

INTRODUCTION

Morphine is widely used in patients and has been reported to alter seizure threshold, but its role in the development of epilepsy is unknown. In this study, role of morphine administration in the development of epilepsy using the status epilepticus (SE) model was determined in rats.

METHODS

Rats experiencing SE with lithium-pilocarpine (LiP) were randomized into four groups- saline, morphine low dose (5 mg/kg, s.c.), morphine high dose (5-20 mg/kg, s.c.), and naloxone (1 mg/kg, s.c.). Treatments were started 90 min after termination of SE and repeated twice daily for next three days. Rats were video monitored daily for 21 days to determine onset and frequency of spontaneous convulsive seizures (SS).

RESULTS

Morphine in low doses increased frequency of SS (1.51 ± 0.15 vs LiP 0.60 ± 0.12 seizures/rat/day, p-value = 0.0026) and seizures occurred during handling (SDH) (0.08 ± 0.02 vs LiP control 0.01 ± 0.01) (p-value = 0.0018). In high doses, no significant change in SS and SDH was found as compared to LiP. No effect of morphine on the onset of SS and percentage of rats experienced SS was found. No effect of naloxone per se was found on SS.

CONCLUSION

Morphine administration after SE does not affect epileptogenesis as no change in the onset of SS and percentage of rats experiencing SS was found. However, it might alter the susceptibility and frequency of SS. As no other study is available with a similar finding, it needs further evaluation.

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.

Trends in prehospital pain management following the introduction of new clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Early pain treatment following injury has been shown to improve long-term outcomes, while untreated pain can facilitate higher posttraumatic stress disorder rates and worsen outcomes. Nonetheless, trauma casualties frequently receive inadequate analgesia. In June 2013, a new clinical practice guideline (CPG) regarding pain management was introduced in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Medical Corps, recommending oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) and low-dose intravenous (IV)/intramuscular ketamine. The purpose of this study was to examine trends in prehospital pain management in the IDF.

METHODS

All cases documented in the IDF trauma registry between 2008 and 2020 were examined. This study compared casualty parameters before and after the introduction of analgesia CPG in 2013. Parameters compared included demographics, injury parameters, treatment modalities, and types of analgesia provided.

RESULT

Overall, 5,653 casualties were included in our study. During the 6 years before the introduction of the CPG, 289 (26.7%) of 1,084 casualties received an analgesic treatment, compared with 1,578 (34.5%) of 4,569 casualties during the 7 years following (p < 0.001). Since its introduction, OTFC was administered to 41.8% of all casualties who received analgesia and became the most used analgesic drug in 2020 (61.1% of casualties receiving analgesia). The rate of IV morphine significantly decreased after 2013 (22.6-16%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pain management has become more common in trauma patients' prehospital care in the IDF in recent years. There has been a significant increase in analgesia administration, with the increased use of OTFC, along with a significant reduction in the use of IV morphine. These results may be attributed to introducing a pain management CPG and implementing OTFC among medical teams. The perception of OTFC as a safe user-friendly analgesic may have contributed to its use by medical providers, increasing analgesia rates overall.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level III.

Prospective cohort study examining the use of regional anesthesia for early pain management after combat-related extremity injury

BACKGROUND

No studies have examined the long-term benefits of regional anesthesia (RA) for pain management after combat-related injury. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to examine the relationship between RA administration and patient-reported pain-related outcomes among Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) service members sustaining a combat-related extremity injury.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2013, n=358 American military personnel injured in OEF/OIF were enrolled at two military treatment facilities. Individuals were followed for up to 2 years after injury. Cohorts were defined based on whether participants were administered RA within 7 days after sustaining a combat-related injury, or not. Linear mixed effects models examined the association between RA and average pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included pain relief, pain interference, neuropathic pain symptoms, treatment outcomes related to pain management, and mental health symptoms.

RESULTS

Receiving early RA was associated with improved average pain over the first 6 months after injury (β=-0.57; p=0.012) adjusting for injury severity and length of stay at the primary treatment facility. This difference was observed up to 24 months after injury (β=-0.36; p=0.046). Individuals receiving early RA reported greater pain relief, improved neuropathic pain intensity, and higher satisfaction with pain outcomes; however, by 24 months, mean scores did not significantly differ between cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate that when administered soon after traumatic injury, RA is a valuable pain management intervention. Future longitudinal studies investigating the timely delivery of RA for optimal pain management in civilian trauma settings are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00431847.

Analysis of Pediatric Trauma in Combat Zone to Inform High-Fidelity Simulation Predeployment Training

OBJECTIVES

The military uses "just-in-time" training to refresh deploying medical personnel on skills necessary for medical and surgical care in the theater of operations. The burden of pediatric care at Role 2 facilities has yet to be characterized; pediatric predeployment training has been extremely limited and primarily informed by anecdotal experience. The goal of this analysis was to describe pediatric care at Role 2 facilities to enable data-driven development of high-fidelity simulation training and core knowledge concepts specific to the combat zone.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

A retrospective review of the Role 2 Database was conducted on all pediatric patients (< 18 yr) admitted to Role 2 in Afghanistan from 2008-2014.

INTERVENTIONS

Three cohorts were determined based on commercially available simulation models: Group 1: less than 1 year, Group 2: 1-8 years, Group 3: more than 8 years. The groups were sub-stratified by point of injury care, pre-hospital management, and Role 2 facility medical/surgical management.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Appropriate descriptive statistics (chi square and Student t test) were utilized to define demographic and epidemiologic characteristics of this population. Of 15,404 patients in the Role 2 Database, 1,318 pediatric subjects (8.5%) were identified. The majority of patients were male (80.0%) with a mean age of 9.5 years (± SD, 4.5). Injury types included: penetrating (56%), blunt (33%), and burns (7%). Mean transport time from point of injury to Role 2 was 198 minutes (±24.5 min). Mean Glasgow Coma Scale and Revised Trauma Score were 14 (± 0.1) and 7.0 (± 1.4), respectively. Role 2 surgical procedures occurred for 424 patients (32%). Overall mortality was 4% (n = 58).

CONCLUSIONS

We have described the epidemiology of pediatric trauma admitted to Role 2 facilities, characterizing the spectrum of pediatric injuries that deploying providers should be equipped to manage. This analysis will function as a needs assessment to facilitate high-fidelity simulation training and the development of "pediatric trauma core knowledge concepts" for deploying providers.

Quality improvement activity for improving pain management in acute extremity injuries in the emergency department

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Demographic, Clinical, and Health System Characteristics Associated With Pain Assessment Documentation and Pain Severity in U.S. Military Patients in Combat Zone Emergency Departments, 2010-2013

Emergency department (ED) pain assessment documentation in trauma patients is critical to ED pain care. This retrospective, cross-sectional study used trauma registry data to evaluate U.S. military combat zone trauma patients injured between 2010 and 2013 requiring ≥ 24-hr inpatient care. Study aims were to identify the frequency of combat zone ED pain assessment documentation and describe pain severity. Secondary aims were to construct statistical models to explain variation in pain assessment documentation and pain severity.Pain scores were documented in 60.5% (n = 3,339) of the 5,518 records evaluated. The proportion of records with ED pain scores increased yearly. Pain assessment documentation was associated with documentation of ED vital signs, comprehensive facility, more recent year, prehospital (PH) heart rate of 60-100 beats/min, ED Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 vs. 14, blunt trauma, and lower injury severity score (ISS).Pain severity scores ranged from 0 to 10; mean = 5.5 (SD = 3.1); median = 6. Higher ED pain scores were associated with Army service compared with Marine Corps, no documented PH vital signs, higher PH pain score, ED respiratory rate < 12 or >16, moderate or severe ISS compared with minor ISS, treatment in a less-equipped facility, and injury in 2011 or 2012 vs. 2010. The pain severity model explained 20.4% of variance in pain severity.Overall, frequency of pain assessment documentation in combat-zone EDs improved yearly, but remained suboptimal. Pain severity was poorly predicted by demographic, clinical, and health system variables available from the trauma registry, emphasizing the importance of individual assessment.

Use and implementation of standard operating procedures and checklists in prehospital emergency medicine: a literature review

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to analyze published literature to introduce the use and implementation of standard operating procedures (SOPs) and checklists in prehospital emergency medicine and their impact on guideline adherence and patient outcome.

METHODS

An English literature search was carried out using the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Springer, Elsevier, and ProQuest databases. Original articles describing the use and implementation of SOPs or checklists in prehospital emergency medicine were included. Editorials, comments, letters, bulletins, news articles, conference abstracts, and notes were excluded from the analysis. Relevant information was extracted relating to application areas, development of SOPs/checklists, educational preparation and training regarding SOPs/checklists implementation, staff attitudes and the effects of SOPs/checklists use on guideline adherence and patient outcomes.

RESULTS

The literature search found 2187 potentially relevant articles, which were narrowed down following an abstract review and a full text review. A final total of 13 studies were identified that described the use and implementation of SOPs (9 studies) and checklists (4 studies) in different areas of prehospital emergency medicine including prehospital management of patients with acute exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute coronary syndrome, prehospital airway management, medical documentation, Emergency Medical Services triage, and transportation of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use and implementation of SOPs and checklists in prehospital emergency medicine have shown some benefits of improving guidelines adherence and patient outcomes in airway management, patient records, identification and triage, and other prehospital interventions. More research in this area is necessary to optimize the future use and implementation of SOPs and checklists to improve emergency personnel performance and patient outcomes.