Article

Impact of critical care-trained flight paramedics on casualty survival during helicopter evacuation in the current war in Afghanistan

US Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas 78234-6315, USA.
The journal of trauma and acute care surgery 08/2012; 73(2 Suppl 1):S32-7. DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182606001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The US Army pioneered medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) by helicopter, yet its system remains essentially unchanged since the Vietnam era. Care is provided by a single combat medic credentialed at the Emergency Medical Technician - Basic level. Treatment protocols, documentation, medical direction, and quality improvement processes are not standardized and vary significantly across US Army helicopter evacuation units. This is in contrast to helicopter emergency medical services that operate within the United States. Current civilian helicopter evacuation platforms are routinely staffed by critical care-trained flight paramedics (CCFP) or comparably trained flight nurses who operate under trained EMS physician medical direction using formalized protocols, standardized patient care documentation, and rigorous quality improvement processes. This study compares mortality of patients with injury from trauma between the US Army's standard helicopter evacuation system staffed with medics at the Emergency Medical Technician - Basic level (standard MEDEVAC) and one staffed with experienced CCFP using adopted civilian helicopter emergency medical services practices.
This is a retrospective study of a natural experiment. Using data from the Joint Theater Trauma Registry, 48-hour mortality for severely injured patients (injury severity score ≥ 16) was compared between patients transported by standard MEDEVAC units and CCFP air ambulance units.
The 48-hour mortality for the CCFP-treated patients was 8% compared to 15% for the standard MEDEVAC patients. After adjustment for covariates, the CCFP system was associated with a 66% lower estimated risk of 48-hour mortality compared to the standard MEDEVAC system.
These findings demonstrate that using an air ambulance system based on modern civilian helicopter EMS practice was associated with a lower estimated risk of 48-hour mortality among severely injured patients in a combat setting.

1 Follower
 · 
218 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Powell-Dunford N, Quesada JF, Malsby RF, Chou V, Gerhardt RT, Gross KR, Shackelford SA. Risk management analysis of air ambulance blood product administration in combat operations. Aviat Space Environ Med 2014; 85:1130–5. Background: Between June–October 2012, 61 flight-medic-directed transfusions took place aboard U.S. Army Medical Evacuation (medevac) helicopters in Afghanistan. This represents the initial experience for pre-hospital blood product transfusion by U.S. Army flight medics. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of clinical records, operating guidelines, after-action reviews, decision and information briefs, bimonthly medical conferences, and medevac-related medical records. Results: A successful program was administered at 10 locations across Afghanistan. Adherence to protocol transfusion indications was 97%. There were 61 casualties who were transfused without any known instance of adverse reaction or local blood product wastage. Shock index (heart rate/systolic blood pressure) improved significantly en route, with a median shock index of 1.6 (IQR 1.2–2.0) pre-transfusion and 1.1 (IQR 1.0–1.5) post-transfusion (P Discussion: Potential risks of medical complications, reverse propaganda, adherence to protocol, and diversion and/or wastage of limited resources were important considerations in the development of the pilot program. Aviation-specific risk mitigation strategies were important to ensure mission success in terms of wastage prevention, standardized operations at multiple locations, and prevention of adverse clinical outcomes. Consideration of aviation risk mitigation strategies may help enable other helicopter emergency medical systems to develop remote pre-hospital transfusion capability. This pilot program provides preliminary evidence that blood product administration by medevac is safe.
    Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine 11/2014; 85(11). DOI:10.3357/ASEM.3851.2014 · 0.78 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Early recognition of hemorrhage during the initial resuscitation of injured patients is associated with improved survival in both civilian and military casualties. We tested a transfusion and life-saving intervention (LSI) prediction algorithm in comparison to clinical judgment of expert trauma care providers.
    Shock (Augusta, Ga.) 11/2014; DOI:10.1097/SHK.0000000000000288 · 2.73 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Damage control resuscitation (DCR) is emerging as a standard practice in civilian and military trauma care. Primary objectives include resolution of immediate life threats followed by optimization of physiological status in the perioperative period. To accomplish this, DCR employs a unique hypotensive–hemostatic resuscitation strategy that avoids traditional crystalloid intravenous fluids in favor of early blood component use in ratios mimicking whole blood. The presence of uncontrolled major hemorrhage (UMH) coupled with a delay in access to hemostatic surgical intervention remains a primary contributor to preventable death in both combat and in many domestic settings, including rural areas and disaster sites. As a result, civilian and military emergency care leaders throughout the world have sought a means to project DCR principles forward of the traditional trauma resuscitation bay, into such remote environments as disaster scenes, rural health facilities, and the contemporary battlefield. After reflecting on experiences from past conflicts, defining current capability gaps, and examining available and potential solutions, a strategy for “remote damage control resuscitation” (RDCR) has been proposed. In order for RDCR to progress from concept to clinical strategy, it will be necessary to define existing gaps in knowledge and clinical capability; develop a lexicon so that investigators and operators may understand each other; establish coherent research and development agendas; and execute comprehensive investigations designed to predict, diagnose, and mitigate the consequences of hemorrhagic shock and acute traumatic coagulopathy before they become irreversible. This article seeks to introduce the concept of RDCR; to reinforce the importance of identifying and optimally managing UMH and the resulting shock state as part of a comprehensive approach to out-of-hospital stabilization and en route care; and to propose investigational strategies to enable the development and broad implementation of RDCR principles.
    Transfusion 01/2013; 53(S1). DOI:10.1111/trf.12030 · 3.57 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
3 Downloads
Available from
Mar 30, 2015