Rethinking limb tourniquet conversion in the prehospital environment

We have highlighted the issue of overuse of tourniquets and described why tourniquet conversion and replacement should be taught and done in the prehospital setting.

Determining Clinical Priorities Using a Clinical Practice Guideline Deconstruction Tool: COVID-19 in Austere Operational Environments

The Joint Trauma System (JTS) publishes Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) used by military and civilian healthcare providers worldwide. With the expansion of CPG development in recent years, there was a need to collate, sort, and deconflict existing and new guidance using systematic methodology both within and across CPGs. This need became readily apparent at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic when guidelines were rapidly developed and fielded in deployed environments. To meet the needs of deploying units requesting immediate and concise guidance for managing COVID-19, JTS developed the CPG entitled Management of Covid-19 in Austere Operational Environments. By applying a deconstruction process to organize clinical recommendations across multiple categories, JTS was able to present clear clinical recommendations across "role of care" and "scope of practice." The use of a deconstruction process supported the rapid socialization of the CPG and may have improved clinical understanding among deployed medical teams.

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.

Analgesia and Sedation for Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Proposed Change 21-02

Analgesia in the military prehospital setting is one of the most essential elements of caring for casualties wounded in combat. The goals of casualty care is to expedite the delivery of life-saving interventions, preserve tactical conditions, and prevent morbidity and mortality. The Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Triple Option Analgesia guideline provided a simplified approach to analgesia in the prehospital combat setting using the options of combat medication pack, oral transmucosal fentanyl, or ketamine. This review will address the following issues related to analgesia on the battlefield: 1. The development of additional pain management strategies. 2. Recommended changes to dosing strategies of medications such as ketamine. 3. Recognition of the tiers within TCCC and guidelines for higher-level providers to use a wider range of analgesia and sedation techniques. 4. An option for sedation in casualties that require procedures. This review also acknowledges the next step of care: Prolonged Casualty Care (PCC). Specific questions addressed in this update include: 1) What additional analgesic options are appropriate for combat casualties? 2) What is the optimal dose of ketamine? 3) What sedation regimen is appropriate for combat casualties?

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.

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.

TCCC Guidelines Comprehensive Review and Edits 2020: TCCC Guidelines Change 20-05 01 November 2020

Based on careful review of the Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Guidelines, the authors developed a list of proposed changes and edits for inclusion in a comprehensive change proposal. To be included in the proposal, individual changes had to meet at least one of three criteria: 1. The change was primarily tactical, operational, or educational rather than clinical in nature. 2. The change was a minor modification to the language of an existing TCCC Guideline. 3. The change, though clinical, was straightforward and noncontentious. The authors initially presented their list to the TCCC Collaboration Group for review at the 11 August 2020 online virtual meeting of the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC). Based on discussions during the virtual meeting and following revisions, a second presentation of guideline modifications was presented during the CoTCCC session of the online virtual Defense Committee on Trauma meeting on 02 September 2020. The CoTCCC conducted voting on the guideline changes in early October 2020 with subsequent inclusion in the updated TCCC Guidelines published on 01 November 2020.1.

Tactical Combat Casualty Care Scenario: Management of a Gunshot Wound to the Chest in a Combat Swimmer

Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) has always emphasized the need to consider the tactical setting in developing a plan to care for wounded unit members while still on the battlefield. The TCCC Guidelines provide an evidence-based trauma care approach to specific injuries that may occur in combat. However, they do not address what modifications might need to be made to the basic TCCC guidelines due to the specific tactical setting in which the scenario occurs. The scenario presented below depicts a combat swimmer operation in which a unit member is shot while in the water. The unit casualty response plan for a combat swimmer who sustains a gunshot wound to the chest while on a mission is complicated by the inability to perform indicated medical interventions for the casualty while he is in the water. It is also complicated by the potential for ballistic damage to his underwater breathing apparatus and the need to remain submerged after wounding for at least for a period of time to avoid further hostile fire. Additionally, there is a potential for a cerebral arterial gas embolism (CAGE) and/or a tension pneumothorax to develop while surfacing because of the decreasing ambient pressure on ascent. The tactical response may be complicated by limited communications between the mission personnel while submerged and by the vulnerability of the mission personnel to antiswimmer measures if their presence is compromised.

The Management of Abdominal Evisceration in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guideline Change 20-02

Historically, about 20% of hospitalized combat injured patients have an abdominal injury. Abdominal evisceration may be expected to complicate as many as one-third of battle-related abdominal wounds. The outcomes for casualties with eviscerating injuries may be significantly improved with appropriate prehospital management. While not as extensively studied as other forms of combat injury, abdominal evisceration management recommendations extend back to at least World War I, when it was recognized as a significant cause of morbidity and was especially associated with bayonet injury. More recently, abdominal evisceration has been noted as a frequent result of penetrating, ballistic trauma. Initial management of abdominal evisceration for prehospital providers consists of assessing for and controlling associated hemorrhage, assessing for bowel content leakage, covering the eviscerated abdominal contents with a moist, sterile barrier, and carefully reassessing the patient. Mortality in abdominal evisceration is more likely to be secondary to associated injuries than to the evisceration itself. Attempting to establish education, training, and a standard of care for nonmedical and medical first responders and to leverage current wound management technologies, the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) conducted a systematic review of historical Service guidelines and recent medical studies that include abdominal evisceration. For abdominal evisceration injuries, the following principles of management apply: (1) Control any associated bleeding visible in the wound. (2) If there is no evidence of spinal cord injury, allow the patient to take the position of most comfort. (3) Rinse the eviscerated bowel with clean fluid to reduce gross contamination. (4) Cover exposed bowel with a moist, sterile dressing or a sterile water-impermeable covering. It is important to keep the wound moist; irrigate the dressing with warm water if available. (4) For reduction in wounds that do not have a substantial loss of abdominal wall, a brief attempt may be made to replace/reduce the eviscerated abdominal contents. If the external contents do not easily go back into the abdominal cavity, do not force or spend more than 60 seconds attempting to reduce contents. If reduction of eviscerated contents is successful, reapproximate the skin using available material, preferably an adhesive dressing like a chest seal (other examples include safety pins, suture, staples, wound closure devices, etc.). Do not attempt to reduce bowel that is actively bleeding or leaking enteric contents. (6) If unable to reduce, cover the eviscerated organs with water-impermeable, nonadhesive material (transparent preferred to allow ability to reassess for ongoing bleeding; examples include a bowel bag, IV bag, clear food wrap, etc.), and then secure the impermeable dressing to the patient using an adhesive dressing (e.g., Ioban, chest seal). (7) Do NOT FORCE contents back into abdomen or actively bleeding viscera. (8) Death in the abdominally eviscerated patient is typically from associated injuries, such as concomitant solid organ or vascular injury, rather than from the evisceration itself. (9) Antibiotics should be administered for any open wounds, including abdominal eviscerating injuries. Parenteral ertapenem is the preferred antibiotic for these injuries.

Tactical Combat Casualty Care Training, Knowledge, and Utilization in the US Army

INTRODUCTION

Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) is the execution of prehospital trauma skills in the combat environment. TCCC was recognized by the 2018 Department of Defense Instruction on Medical Readiness Training as a critical wartime task. This study examines the training, understanding, and utilization of TCCC principles and guidelines among US Army medical providers and examines provider confidence of medics in performing TCCC skills.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional survey, developed by members of the Committee on TCCC, was distributed to all US Army Physicians and Physician Assistants via anonymous electronic communication.

RESULTS

A total of 613 completed surveys were included in the analyses. Logistic regression analyses were conducted on: TCCC test score of 80% or higher, confidence with medic utilization of TCCC, and medic utilization of ketamine in accordance with TCCC.

CONCLUSIONS

<60% of respondents expressed confidence in the ability of the medics to perform all TCCC skills. Supervising providers who that believed 80 to 100% of their medics had completed TCCC training had more confidence in their medic's TCCC abilities. With TCCC, a recognized lifesaver on the battlefield, continued training and utilization of TCCC concepts are paramount for deploying personnel.

Comparison of Military and Civilian Methods for Determining Potentially Preventable Deaths: A Systematic Review

Importance

Military and civilian trauma experts initiated a collaborative effort to develop an integrated learning trauma system to reduce preventable morbidity and mortality. Because the Department of Defense does not currently have recommended guidelines and standard operating procedures to perform military preventable death reviews in a consistent manner, these performance improvement processes must be developed.

Objectives

To compare military and civilian preventable death determination methods to understand the existing best practices for evaluating preventable death.

Evidence Review

This systematic review followed the PRISMA reporting guidelines. English-language articles were searched from inception to February 15, 2017, using the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (Ovid), PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar. Articles were initially screened for eligibility and excluded based on predetermined criteria. Articles reviewing only prehospital deaths, only inhospital deaths, or both were eligible for inclusion. Information on study characteristics was independently abstracted by 2 investigators. Reported are methodological factors affecting the reliability of preventable death studies and the preventable death rate, defined as the number of potentially preventable deaths divided by the total number of deaths within a specific patient population.

Findings

Fifty studies (8 military and 42 civilian) met the inclusion criteria. In total, 1598 of 6500 military deaths reviewed and 3346 of 19 108 civilian deaths reviewed were classified as potentially preventable. Among military studies, the preventable death rate ranged from 3.1% to 51.4%. Among civilian studies, the preventable death rate ranged from 2.5% to 85.3%. The high level of methodological heterogeneity regarding factors, such as preventable death definitions, review process, and determination criteria, hinders a meaningful quantitative comparison of preventable death rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

The reliability of military and civilian preventable death studies is hindered by inconsistent definitions, incompatible criteria, and the overall heterogeneity in study methods. The complexity, inconsistency, and unpredictability of combat require unique considerations to perform a methodologically sound combat-related preventable death review. As the Department of Defense begins the process of developing recommended guidelines and standard operating procedures for performing military preventable death reviews, consideration must be given to the factors known to increase the risk of bias and poor reliability.

National Stop the Bleed Day: The impact of a social media campaign on the Stop the Bleed program

BACKGROUND

National Stop the Bleed Day (NSTBD) was created to increase public awareness of the official Stop-the-Bleed initiative and the Bleeding Control Basic course. The goal was to develop and employ an effective national social media strategy that would encourage and support efforts already in place to train the public in basic bleeding control techniques.

METHODS

March 31, 2018, was designated as NSTBD. Analysis focused on a 2-week window centered on NSTBD. The number of courses offered, number of instructors registered and total number of students trained overall during this period was derived from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) website bleedingcontrol.org. Courses not registered with the ACS were not included. Data on overall website activity were also included for analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-three states and 18 countries participated in NSTBD. During the study period, there were 1884 courses registered on bleedingcontrol.org. Comparatively, over a 4-month period from August to November 2017, the mean number of registered courses per month was 834. There were 34,699 students trained during the two-week study period as opposed to August to November 2017, the mean number of people trained per month was 9,626. In addition, 576 new B-Con instructors were certified during this time window. Additionally, the international coordinators reported 1500 students were trained during the study period. During this time, the ACS reported a significant increase in website activity. This included 10,530 new visitors, 12,772 visitors overall and 35,342 page views recorded during the study period.

CONCLUSION

The NSTBD effort was successful in generating widespread interest for the Stop-the-Bleed initiative. The use of a targeted social media campaign in this context was successful in driving people to available training opportunities while also increasing awareness of the overall effort. While only in its early stages, the NSTBD concept is a good one and should be developed further in coming years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective, Level V.

Advanced Resuscitative Care in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 18-01:14 October 2018

TCCC has previously recommended interventions that can effectively prevent 4 of the top 5 causes of prehospital preventable death in combat casualties-extremity hemorrhage, junctional hemorrhage, airway obstruction, and tension pneumothorax- and deaths from these causes have been markedly reduced in US combat casualties. Noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) is the last remaining major cause of preventable death on the battlefield and often causes death within 30 minutes of wounding. Increased use of whole blood, including the capability for massive transfusion, if indicated, has the potential to increase survival in casualties with either thoracic and/or abdominopelvic hemorrhage. Additionally, Zone 1 Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) can provide temporary control of bleeding in the abdomen and pelvis and improve hemodynamics in casualties who may be approaching traumatic cardiac arrest as a result of hemorrhagic shock. Together, these two interventions are designated Advanced Resuscitative Care (ARC) and may enable casualties with severe NCTH to survive long enough to reach the care of a surgeon. Although Special Operations units are now using whole blood far-forward, this capability is not routinely present in other US combat units at this point in time. REBOA is not envisioned as care that could be accomplished by a unit medic working out of his or her aid bag. This intervention should be undertaken only by designated teams of advanced combat medical personnel with special training and equipment.

Improvised Inguinal Junctional Tourniquets: Recommendations From the Special Operations Combat Medical Skills Sustainment Course

Effectively and rapidly controlling significant junctional hemorrhage is an important effort of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and can potentially contribute to greater survival on the battlefield. Although the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved labeling of four devices for use as junctional tourniquets, many Special Operations Forces (SOF) medics do not carry commercially marketed junctional tourniquets. As part of ongoing educational improvement during Special Operations Combat Medical Skills Sustainment Courses (SOCMSSC), the authors surveyed medics to determine why they do not carry commercial tourniquets and present principles and methods of improvised junctional tourniquet (IJT) application. The authors describe the construction and application of IJTs, including the use of available pressure delivery devices and emphasizing that successful application requires sufficient and repetitive training.

2019 Recommended Limb Tourniquets in Tactical Combat Casualty Care

Military and civilian trauma can be distinctly different but the leading cause of preventable trauma deaths in the prehospital environment, extremity hemorrhage, does not discriminate. The current paper is the most comprehensive review of limb tourniquets employable in the tactical combat casualty care environment and provides the first update to the CoTCCC-recommended limb tourniquets since 2005. This review also highlights the lack of unbiased data, official reporting mechanisms, and official studies with established criteria for evaluating tourniquets. Upon review of the data, the CoTCCC voted to update the recommendations in April 2019.

Management of Suspected Tension Pneumothorax in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 17-02

This change to the Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Guidelines that updates the recommendations for management of suspected tension pneumothorax for combat casualties in the prehospital setting does the following things: (1) Continues the aggressive approach to suspecting and treating tension pneumothorax based on mechanism of injury and respiratory distress that TCCC has advocated for in the past, as opposed to waiting until shock develops as a result of the tension pneumothorax before treating. The new wording does, however, emphasize that shock and cardiac arrest may ensue if the tension pneumothorax is not treated promptly. (2) Adds additional emphasis to the importance of the current TCCC recommendation to perform needle decompression (NDC) on both sides of the chest on a combat casualty with torso trauma who suffers a traumatic cardiac arrest before reaching a medical treatment facility. (3) Adds a 10-gauge, 3.25-in needle/ catheter unit as an alternative to the previously recommended 14-gauge, 3.25-in needle/catheter unit as recommended devices for needle decompression. (4) Designates the location at which NDC should be performed as either the lateral site (fifth intercostal space [ICS] at the anterior axillary line [AAL]) or the anterior site (second ICS at the midclavicular line [MCL]). For the reasons enumerated in the body of the change report, participants on the 14 December 2017 TCCC Working Group teleconference favored including both potential sites for NDC without specifying a preferred site. (5) Adds two key elements to the description of the NDC procedure: insert the needle/ catheter unit at a perpendicular angle to the chest wall all the way to the hub, then hold the needle/catheter unit in place for 5 to 10 seconds before removing the needle in order to allow for full decompression of the pleural space to occur. (6) Defines what constitutes a successful NDC, using specific metrics such as: an observed hiss of air escaping from the chest during the NDC procedure; a decrease in respiratory distress; an increase in hemoglobin oxygen saturation; and/or an improvement in signs of shock that may be present. (7) Recommends that only two needle decompressions be attempted before continuing on to the "Circulation" portion of the TCCC Guidelines. After two NDCs have been performed, the combat medical provider should proceed to the fourth element in the "MARCH" algorithm and evaluate/treat the casualty for shock as outlined in the Circulation section of the TCCC Guidelines. Eastridge's landmark 2012 report documented that noncompressible hemorrhage caused many more combat fatalities than tension pneumothorax.1 Since the manifestations of hemorrhagic shock and shock from tension pneumothorax may be similar, the TCCC Guidelines now recommend proceeding to treatment for hemorrhagic shock (when present) after two NDCs have been performed. (8) Adds a paragraph to the end of the Circulation section of the TCCC Guidelines that calls for consideration of untreated tension pneumothorax as a potential cause for shock that has not responded to fluid resuscitation. This is an important aspect of treating shock in combat casualties that was not presently addressed in the TCCC Guidelines. (9) Adds finger thoracostomy (simple thoracostomy) and chest tubes as additional treatment options to treat suspected tension pneumothorax when further treatment is deemed necessary after two unsuccessful NDC attempts-if the combat medical provider has the skills, experience, and authorizations to perform these advanced interventions and the casualty is in shock. These two more invasive procedures are recommended only when the casualty is in refractory shock, not as the initial treatment.

Extraglottic Airways in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 17-01 28 August 2017

Extraglottic airway (EGA) devices have been used by both physicians and prehospital providers for several decades. The original TCCC Guidelines published in 1996 included a recommendation to use the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) as an option to assist in securing the airway in Tactical Evacuation (TACEVAC) phase of care. Since then, a variety of EGAs have been used in both combat casualty care and civilian trauma care. In 2012, the Committee on TCCC (CoTCCC) and the Defense Health Board (DHB) reaffirmed support for the use of supraglottic airway (SGA) devices in the TACEVAC phase of TCCC, but did not recommend a specific SGA based on the evidence available at that point in time. This paper will use the more inclusive term "extraglottic airway" instead of the term "supragottic airway" used in the DHB memo. Current evidence suggests that the i-gel® (Intersurgical Complete Respiratory Systems; http://www.intersurgical.com/info/igel) EGA performs as well or better than the other EGAs available and has other advantages in ease of training, size and weight, cost, safety, and simplicity of use. The gel-filled cuff in the i-gel both eliminates the need for cuff pressure monitoring during flight and reduces the risk of pressure-induced neuropraxia to cranial nerves in the oropharynx and hypopharynx as a complication of EGA use. The i-gel thus makes the medic's tasks simpler and frees him or her from the requirement to carry a cuff manometer as part of the medical kit. This latest change to the TCCC Guidelines as described below does the following things: (1) adds extraglottic airways (EGAs) as an option for airway management in Tactical Field Care; (2) recommends the i-gel as the preferred EGA in TCCC because its gel-filled cuff makes it simpler to use than EGAs with air-filled cuffs and also eliminates the need for monitoring of cuff pressure; (3) notes that should an EGA with an air-filled cuff be used, the pressure in the cuff must be monitored, especially during and after changes in altitude during casualty transport; (4) emphasizes COL Bob Mabry's often-made point that extraglottic airways will not be tolerated by a casualty unless he or she is deeply unconscious and notes that an NPA is a better option if there is doubt about whether or not the casualty will tolerate an EGA; (5) adds the use of suction as an adjunct to airway management when available and appropriate (i.e., when needed to remove blood and vomitus); (6) clarifies the wording regarding cervical spine stabilization to emphasize that it is not needed for casualties who have sustained only penetrating trauma (without blunt force trauma); (7) reinforces that surgical cricothyroidotomies should not be performed simply because a casualty is unconscious; (8) provides a reminder that, for casualties with facial trauma or facial burns with suspected inhalation injury, neither NPAs nor EGAs may be adequate for airway management, and a surgical cricothyroidotomy may be required; (9) adds that pulse oximetry monitoring is a useful adjunct to assess airway patency and that capnography should also be used in the TACEVAC phase of care; and (10) reinforces that a casualty's airway status may change over time and that he or she should be frequently reassessed.

TCCC Guidelines Comprehensive Review and Update: TCCC Guidelines Change 16-03

Based on careful review of the Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) Guidelines, the authors developed a list of proposed changes for inclusion in a comprehensive change proposal. To be included in the proposal, individual changes had to meet at least one of three criteria: (1) The change was primarily tactical rather than clinical; (2) the change was a minor modification to the language of an existing TCCC Guideline; and (3) the change, though clinical, was straightforward and noncontentious. The authors presented their list to the TCCC Working Group for review and approval at the 7 September 2016 meeting of the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC). Twenty-three items met with general agreement and were retained in this change proposal.

Review of 54 Cases of Prolonged Field Care

BACKGROUND

Prolonged field care (PFC) is field medical care applied beyond doctrinal planning time-lines. As current and future medical operations must include deliberate and contingency planning for such events, data are lacking to support efforts. A case review was conducted to define the epidemiology, environment, and operational factors that affect PFC outcomes.

METHODS

A survey distributed to US military medical providers solicited details of PFC encounters lasting more than 4 hours and included patient demographics, environmental descriptors, provider training, modes of transportation, injuries, mechanism of injury, vital signs, treatments, equipment and resources used, duration of PFC, and morbidity and mortality status on delivery to the next level of care. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses.

RESULTS

Surveys from 54 patients treated during 41 missions were analyzed. The PFC provider was on scene at time of injury or illness for 40.7% (22/54) of cases. The environment was described as remote or austere for 96.3% (52/54) of cases. Enemy activity or weather also contributed to need for PFC in 37.0% (20/54) of cases. Care was provided primarily outdoors (37.0%; 20/54) and in hardened nonmedical structures (37.0%; 20/54) with 42.6% (23/54) of cases managed in two or more locations or transport platforms. Teleconsultation was obtained in 14.8% (8/54) of cases. The prehospital time of care ranged from 4 to 120 hours (median 10 hours), and five (9.3%) patients died prior to transport to next level of care.

CONCLUSION

PFC in the prehospital setting is a vital area of military medicine about which data are sparse. This review was a novel initial analysis of recent US military PFC experiences, with descriptive findings that should prove helpful for future efforts to include defining unique skillsets and capabilities needed to effectively respond to a variety of PFC contingencies.

A Triple-Option Analgesia Plan for Tactical Combat Casualty Care: TCCC Guidelines Change 13-04

Although the majority of potentially preventable fatalities among U.S. combat forces serving in Afghanistan and Iraq have died from hemorrhagic shock, the majority of U.S. medics carry morphine autoinjectors for prehospital battlefield analgesia. Morphine given intramuscularly has a delayed onset of action and, like all opioids, may worsen hemorrhagic shock. Additionally, on a recent assessment of prehospital care in Afghanistan, combat medical personnel noted that Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) battlefield analgesia recommendations need to be simplified--there are too many options and not enough clear guidance on which medication to use in specific situations. They also reported that ketamine is presently being used as a battlefield analgesic by some medics in theater with good results. This report proposes that battlefield analgesia be achieved using one or more of three options: (1) the meloxicam and Tylenol in the TCCC Combat Pill Pack for casualties with relatively minor pain who are still able to function as effective combatants; (2) oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) for casualties who have moderate to severe pain, but who are not in hemorrhagic shock or respiratory distress and are not at significant risk for developing either condition; or (3) ketamine for casualties who have moderate to severe pain but who are in hemorrhagic shock or respiratory distress or are at significant risk for developing either condition. Ketamine may also be used to increase analgesic effect for casualties who have previously been given opioids (morphine or fentanyl.).

Tragedy into drama: an american history of tourniquet use in the current war

BACKGROUND

Although the scientific results of recent tourniquet advances in first aid are well recorded, the process by which tourniquet use advances were made is not. The purpose of the present report is to distill historical aspects of this tourniquet story during the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to aid scientists, leaders, and clinicians in the process of development of future improvements in first aid.

METHODS

The process of how developments of this tourniquet story happened recently is detailed chronologically and thematically in a ?who did what, when, where, why, and how? way.

RESULTS

Initially in these wars, tourniquets were used rarely or were used as a means of last resort. Such delay in tourniquet use was often lethal; subsequently, use was improved incrementally over time by many people at several organizations. Three sequential keys to success were (1) unlocking the impasse of enacting doctrinal ideas already approved, (2) reaching a critical density of both tourniquets and trained users on the battlefield, and (3) capturing their experience with tourniquets. Other keys included translating needs among stakeholders (such as casualties, combat medics, providers, trainers, and decision-makers) and problem-solving logistic snags and other issues. Eventually, refined care was shown to improve survival rates. From all medical interventions evidenced in the current wars, the tourniquet broke rank and moved to the forefront as the prehospital medical breakthrough of the war.

CONCLUSION

The recorded process of how tourniquet developments in prehospital care occurred may be used as a reference for parallel efforts in first aid such as attempts to improve care for airway and breathing problems.

Management of External Hemorrhage in Tactical Combat Casualty Care: The Adjunctive Use of XStat™ Compressed Hemostatic Sponges: TCCC Guidelines Change 15-03

Exsanguination from wounds in the so-called junctional regions of the body (i.e., the neck, the axilla, and the groin) was responsible for 19% of the combat fatalities who died from potentially survivable wounds sustained in Afghanistan or Iraq during 2001 to 2011. The development of improved techniques and technology to manage junctional hemorrhage has been identified in the past as a high-priority item by the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) and the Army Surgeon General's Dismounted Complex Blast Injury (DCBI) Task Force. Additionally, prehospital care providers have had limited options with which to manage hemorrhage resulting from deep, narrow-track, penetrating trauma. XStat™ is a new product recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as a hemostatic adjunct to aid in the control of bleeding from junctional wounds in the groin or axilla. XStat has now been recommended by the CoTCCC as another tool for the combat medical provider to use in the management of junctional hemorrhage. The evidence that supports adding XStat to the TCCC Guidelines for the treatment of external hemorrhage is summarized in this paper.

The Tactical Combat Casualty Care Casualty Card TCCC Guidelines ? Proposed Change 1301

Optimizing trauma care delivery is paramount to saving lives on the battlefield. During the past decade of conflict, trauma care performance improvement at combat support hospitals and forward surgical teams in Afghanistan and Iraq has increased through Joint Trauma System and DoD Trauma Registry data collection, analysis, and rapid evidence-based adjustments to clinical practice guidelines. Although casualties have benefitted greatly from a trauma system and registry that improves hospital care, still lacking is a comprehensive and integrated system for data collection and analysis to improve performance at the prehospital level of care. Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) based casualty cards, TCCC after action reports, and unit-based prehospital trauma registries need to be implemented globally and linked to the DoD Trauma Registry in a seamless manner that will optimize prehospital trauma care delivery.

A prehospital trauma registry for tactical combat casualty care

Many combat-related deaths occur in the prehospital environment before the casualty reaches a medical treatment facility. The tenets of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) were published in 1996 and integrated throughout the 75th Ranger Regiment in 1999. In order to validate and refine TCCC protocols and procedures, a prehospital trauma registry was developed and maintained. The application of TCCC, in conjunction with validation and refinement of TCCC through feedback from a prehospital trauma registry, has translated to an increase in survivability on the battlefield.

A prehospital trauma registry for tactical combat casualty care

Many combat-related deaths occur in the prehospital environment before the casualty reaches a medical treatment facility. The tenets of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) were published in 1996 and integrated throughout the 75th Ranger Regiment in 1999. In order to validate and refine TCCC protocols and procedures, a prehospital trauma registry was developed and maintained. The application of TCCC, in conjunction with validation and refinement of TCCC through feedback from a prehospital trauma registry, has translated to an increase in survivability on the battlefield.