美军特种作战人员与常规作战人员伤害模式和干预措施的比较。

Casey Lockett, Jason F Naylor, Andrew D Fisher, Brit J Long, Michael D April, Steven G Schauer
{"title":"美军特种作战人员与常规作战人员伤害模式和干预措施的比较。","authors":"Casey Lockett,&nbsp;Jason F Naylor,&nbsp;Andrew D Fisher,&nbsp;Brit J Long,&nbsp;Michael D April,&nbsp;Steven G Schauer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the course of the US' Global War on Terrorism, its military has utilized both conventional and special operations forces (SOF). These entities have sustained and treated battlefield casualties in the prehospital, Role 1 setting, while also making efforts to mitigate risks to the force and pursuing improved interventions. The goal of this study is to compare outcomes and prehospital medical interventions between SOF and conventional military combat casualties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of previously published data from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. The casualties were categorized as special operations if they were 18-series, Navy SEAL, Pararescue Jumper, Tactical Air Control Party, Combat Controller, and Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance. The remainder with a documented military occupational specialty (MOS) were classified as conventional forces.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within our dataset, a MOS was categorizable for 1806 conventional and 130 special operations. Conventional forces were younger age (24 versus 30, p is less than 0.001). Conventional forces had a higher proportion of explosive injuries (61% versus 44%) but a lower proportion of firearm injuries (22% versus 42%, p is less than 0.001). The median injury severity scores were similar between the groups. Conventional forces had lower rates of documentation for all metrics: pulse, respiratory rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, Glasgow Coma Scale, and pain score. On adjusted analyses, SOF had higher odds of receiving an extremity splint, packed red blood cells, whole blood, tranexamic acid, ketamine, and fentanyl.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SOF had consistently better medical documentation rates, more use of ketamine and fentanyl, less morphine administration, and lower threshold for use of blood products in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Our findings suggest lessons learned from the SOF medics should be extrapolated to the conventional forces for improved medical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":74148,"journal":{"name":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Injury Patterns and Interventions among US Military Special Operations Versus Conventional Forces Combatants.\",\"authors\":\"Casey Lockett,&nbsp;Jason F Naylor,&nbsp;Andrew D Fisher,&nbsp;Brit J Long,&nbsp;Michael D April,&nbsp;Steven G Schauer\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the course of the US' Global War on Terrorism, its military has utilized both conventional and special operations forces (SOF). These entities have sustained and treated battlefield casualties in the prehospital, Role 1 setting, while also making efforts to mitigate risks to the force and pursuing improved interventions. The goal of this study is to compare outcomes and prehospital medical interventions between SOF and conventional military combat casualties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of previously published data from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. The casualties were categorized as special operations if they were 18-series, Navy SEAL, Pararescue Jumper, Tactical Air Control Party, Combat Controller, and Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance. The remainder with a documented military occupational specialty (MOS) were classified as conventional forces.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within our dataset, a MOS was categorizable for 1806 conventional and 130 special operations. Conventional forces were younger age (24 versus 30, p is less than 0.001). Conventional forces had a higher proportion of explosive injuries (61% versus 44%) but a lower proportion of firearm injuries (22% versus 42%, p is less than 0.001). The median injury severity scores were similar between the groups. Conventional forces had lower rates of documentation for all metrics: pulse, respiratory rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, Glasgow Coma Scale, and pain score. On adjusted analyses, SOF had higher odds of receiving an extremity splint, packed red blood cells, whole blood, tranexamic acid, ketamine, and fentanyl.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SOF had consistently better medical documentation rates, more use of ketamine and fentanyl, less morphine administration, and lower threshold for use of blood products in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Our findings suggest lessons learned from the SOF medics should be extrapolated to the conventional forces for improved medical care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74148,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在美国全球反恐战争的过程中,其军队使用了常规和特种作战部队(SOF)。这些实体在院前第1角色环境中维持和治疗战场伤亡,同时也努力减轻部队面临的风险,并寻求改进干预措施。本研究的目的是比较SOF和常规军事战斗伤亡的结果和院前医疗干预。方法:这是对国防部创伤登记处先前公布的数据的二次分析。如果是特种部队(18系列)、海豹突击队(SEAL)、跳伞队员(pararerescue Jumper)、战术空中管制队(Tactical Air Control Party)、战斗指挥员(Combat Controller)、海军陆战队侦察队(Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance)等,则被分类为特种部队。其余具有军事职业专长(MOS)的被归类为常规部队。结果:在我们的数据集中,MOS可用于1806个常规操作和130个特殊操作。常规力量的年龄较年轻(24岁对30岁,p < 0.001)。常规部队的爆炸伤害比例较高(61%比44%),但火器伤害比例较低(22%比42%,p < 0.001)。两组间的中位损伤严重程度评分相似。常规部队在所有指标上的记录率较低:脉搏、呼吸频率、血压、血氧饱和度、格拉斯哥昏迷量表和疼痛评分。经调整分析,SOF患者接受四肢夹板、填充红细胞、全血、氨甲环酸、氯胺酮和芬太尼治疗的几率更高。结论:在未调整和调整分析中,SOF均具有较高的医疗记录率,氯胺酮和芬太尼的使用较多,吗啡的使用较少,血液制品的使用阈值较低。我们的研究结果表明,从特种部队医务人员那里吸取的经验教训应该推广到常规部队,以改善医疗保健。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Comparison of Injury Patterns and Interventions among US Military Special Operations Versus Conventional Forces Combatants.

Background: Over the course of the US' Global War on Terrorism, its military has utilized both conventional and special operations forces (SOF). These entities have sustained and treated battlefield casualties in the prehospital, Role 1 setting, while also making efforts to mitigate risks to the force and pursuing improved interventions. The goal of this study is to compare outcomes and prehospital medical interventions between SOF and conventional military combat casualties.

Methods: This is a secondary analysis of previously published data from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. The casualties were categorized as special operations if they were 18-series, Navy SEAL, Pararescue Jumper, Tactical Air Control Party, Combat Controller, and Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance. The remainder with a documented military occupational specialty (MOS) were classified as conventional forces.

Results: Within our dataset, a MOS was categorizable for 1806 conventional and 130 special operations. Conventional forces were younger age (24 versus 30, p is less than 0.001). Conventional forces had a higher proportion of explosive injuries (61% versus 44%) but a lower proportion of firearm injuries (22% versus 42%, p is less than 0.001). The median injury severity scores were similar between the groups. Conventional forces had lower rates of documentation for all metrics: pulse, respiratory rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, Glasgow Coma Scale, and pain score. On adjusted analyses, SOF had higher odds of receiving an extremity splint, packed red blood cells, whole blood, tranexamic acid, ketamine, and fentanyl.

Conclusion: SOF had consistently better medical documentation rates, more use of ketamine and fentanyl, less morphine administration, and lower threshold for use of blood products in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Our findings suggest lessons learned from the SOF medics should be extrapolated to the conventional forces for improved medical care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Closing the Trauma and Critical Care Gap: A Paradigm Shift through Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. MRI Predictive Model's Utility in a Recruit Training Environment for Tibia Stress Fractures. Platelet-Rich Plasma Improves Strength and Speed of Recovery in an Active-Duty Soldier with Isolated Injury to the Lateral Collateral Ligament of the Knee: A Case Report. The Continued Misadventures of Intentional C4 Ingestion: A Case Cluster. Impact of a Novel Biplane User Interface on Ultrasound-Guided Vascular Access Performance: A Prospective, Randomized, Crossover Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1