Military Medical Training for Role 1 and Role 2 Combat Casualty Care Skills: A Narrative Review.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jennifer L Patton, Kiffin R Smallegan, Emily R Latimer, Anna R Prendergast, Gary J Jimenez Pena, Angela K Phillips
{"title":"Military Medical Training for Role 1 and Role 2 Combat Casualty Care Skills: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Jennifer L Patton, Kiffin R Smallegan, Emily R Latimer, Anna R Prendergast, Gary J Jimenez Pena, Angela K Phillips","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usag411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Military medics are often tasked to train other medics. While there is ample content of what to train, there exists a lack of trainer education or emphasis on how to train others effectively. Current military medical training is highly variable, often relying on anecdotal methods, with limited evaluation of training effectiveness. Although the importance of readiness training is well recognized, little attention has been devoted to identifying evidence-based approaches for training military medics. This narrative review sought to synthesize available evidence on training methods for military medics on skills performed in Role 1 or Role 2 settings.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A narrative review using systematic search and screening methods was conducted. A research librarian searched multiple databases using the MeSH terms \"clinical education\" and \"military.\" The articles were reviewed by the 6-person team using the Appraisal Tool Selection Algorithm and appraised for quality using the Pre-Appraised Evidence Appraisal Tool, © 2025 Johns Hopkins Health System, with permission.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1,222 screened articles, 44 met inclusion and quality criteria for final synthesis. Two overarching themes emerged: training methods and training evaluation. Training methods varied by audience, design, and modality. Many studies developed training methods centered around the audience, whether individual or team-focused. Training design and content was variably informed by the utilization of clinical practice guidelines, literature reviews, needs assessments, and expert opinion. Most studies employed multimodal approaches combining didactic instruction with hands-on or simulation-based practice. Training evaluation included both subjective and objective measures, including self-efficacy, knowledge testing, time to task completion, graded simulations, and clinical practice volume.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This review highlights significant variability in how military medical readiness training is designed, delivered, and evaluated. Evidence suggests that effective training should be designed for the target audience, grounded in adult learning theories, multimodal, and evaluated using a combination of subjective and objective measures. Limitations to the articles utilized for this review include heterogeneous study designs, reliance on short-term outcomes, and weak generalizability. Addressing gaps in educator preparation, evaluation rigor, and policy for prioritization of training may improve the effectiveness of military medical readiness training. Future research should focus on validating objective evaluation tools, assessing skill retention, and optimizing team-based training to enhance operational readiness and force capability.</p>","PeriodicalId":18638,"journal":{"name":"Military Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usag411","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Military medics are often tasked to train other medics. While there is ample content of what to train, there exists a lack of trainer education or emphasis on how to train others effectively. Current military medical training is highly variable, often relying on anecdotal methods, with limited evaluation of training effectiveness. Although the importance of readiness training is well recognized, little attention has been devoted to identifying evidence-based approaches for training military medics. This narrative review sought to synthesize available evidence on training methods for military medics on skills performed in Role 1 or Role 2 settings.

Materials and methods: A narrative review using systematic search and screening methods was conducted. A research librarian searched multiple databases using the MeSH terms "clinical education" and "military." The articles were reviewed by the 6-person team using the Appraisal Tool Selection Algorithm and appraised for quality using the Pre-Appraised Evidence Appraisal Tool, © 2025 Johns Hopkins Health System, with permission.

Results: From 1,222 screened articles, 44 met inclusion and quality criteria for final synthesis. Two overarching themes emerged: training methods and training evaluation. Training methods varied by audience, design, and modality. Many studies developed training methods centered around the audience, whether individual or team-focused. Training design and content was variably informed by the utilization of clinical practice guidelines, literature reviews, needs assessments, and expert opinion. Most studies employed multimodal approaches combining didactic instruction with hands-on or simulation-based practice. Training evaluation included both subjective and objective measures, including self-efficacy, knowledge testing, time to task completion, graded simulations, and clinical practice volume.

Conclusions: This review highlights significant variability in how military medical readiness training is designed, delivered, and evaluated. Evidence suggests that effective training should be designed for the target audience, grounded in adult learning theories, multimodal, and evaluated using a combination of subjective and objective measures. Limitations to the articles utilized for this review include heterogeneous study designs, reliance on short-term outcomes, and weak generalizability. Addressing gaps in educator preparation, evaluation rigor, and policy for prioritization of training may improve the effectiveness of military medical readiness training. Future research should focus on validating objective evaluation tools, assessing skill retention, and optimizing team-based training to enhance operational readiness and force capability.

角色1和角色2的军事医学训练战斗伤亡护理技能:叙述回顾。
简介:军医经常承担训练其他军医的任务。虽然培训内容丰富,但缺乏培训师教育,也缺乏对如何有效培训他人的重视。目前的军事医学训练变化很大,往往依靠传闻方法,对训练效果的评估有限。虽然战备训练的重要性已得到充分认识,但很少有人关注如何确定训练军医的循证方法。这篇叙述性综述试图综合现有的关于军医在角色1或角色2设置下的技能训练方法的证据。材料与方法:采用系统检索筛选的方法进行叙述性综述。一位研究馆员使用MeSH术语“临床教育”和“军事”搜索多个数据库。6人小组使用评估工具选择算法对文章进行审查,并使用预评估证据评估工具对文章质量进行评估,©2025 Johns Hopkins Health System,并获得许可。结果:从1222篇筛选的文章中,44篇符合最终合成的纳入和质量标准。出现了两个主要主题:培训方法和培训评价。训练方法因受众、设计和形式而异。许多研究开发了以观众为中心的训练方法,无论是个人还是团队。培训的设计和内容根据临床实践指南、文献综述、需求评估和专家意见的不同而有所不同。大多数研究采用多模态方法,将教学指导与动手或模拟实践相结合。培训评估包括主观和客观测量,包括自我效能感、知识测试、任务完成时间、分级模拟和临床实践量。结论:本综述强调了军事医疗准备训练如何设计、交付和评估的显著差异。有证据表明,有效的培训应该针对目标受众设计,以成人学习理论为基础,采用多模式,并使用主观和客观措施相结合的方法进行评估。本综述使用的文章的局限性包括异质研究设计、对短期结果的依赖以及较弱的通用性。解决教育工作者准备、评估严谨性和培训优先顺序政策方面的差距可能会提高军事医疗准备培训的有效性。未来的研究应侧重于验证客观评估工具,评估技能保留,优化基于团队的培训,以增强作战准备和部队能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Military Medicine
Military Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
393
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Military Medicine is the official international journal of AMSUS. Articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed scientific papers, case reports, and editorials. The journal also publishes letters to the editor. The objective of the journal is to promote awareness of federal medicine by providing a forum for responsible discussion of common ideas and problems relevant to federal healthcare. Its mission is: To increase healthcare education by providing scientific and other information to its readers; to facilitate communication; and to offer a prestige publication for members’ writings.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书