太空探索医疗后送风险定性调查。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 BIOPHYSICS
Austin Almand, Sam Y Ko, Arian Anderson, Ryan J Keller, Michael Zero, Allison P Anderson, Jonathan M Laws, Kris Lehnhardt, Benjamin D Easter
{"title":"太空探索医疗后送风险定性调查。","authors":"Austin Almand, Sam Y Ko, Arian Anderson, Ryan J Keller, Michael Zero, Allison P Anderson, Jonathan M Laws, Kris Lehnhardt, Benjamin D Easter","doi":"10.3357/AMHP.6262.2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>INTRODUCTION:</b> Exploration beyond low Earth orbit requires innovative solutions to support the crew medically, especially as the opportunity for timely evacuation to Earth diminishes. This includes assessing the risks and benefits that a complicated medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) poses to the injured crewmember, the crew, and the mission. This qualitative study identifies common MEDEVAC risk assessment principles used in spaceflight and other extreme environments to better inform future risk assessment tools and exploration mission concepts.<b>METHODS:</b> Semistructured interviews were conducted with subject matter experts in spaceflight and analog domains, including polar operations, undersea operations, combat medicine, and mountaineering. Transcripts were analyzed using the qualitative method of Thematic Analysis with the technique of consensus, co-occurrence, and comparison.<b>RESULTS:</b> Subject matter experts described 18 themes divided into two main categories: Primary Risk Considerations (e.g., crew, mission, resources, time) and Contributing Factors (e.g., psychological considerations, medical preparation, politics).<b>DISCUSSION:</b> Primary Risk Considerations can assess MEDEVAC risk across mission phases, with Contributing Factors acting as premission tools to adjust those risks. Inter- and intracategory connections identified medical support considerations, MEDEVAC support considerations, and philosophy as the most impactful Contributing Factors. Medical support considerations, psychological considerations, and political considerations were found to have unique aspects given the distances and societal impact of exploration vs. low Earth orbit spaceflight. The Contributing Factor theme of decision making was determined to be unique due to its impacts across both categories. These findings expand current considerations and are important inputs for exploration mission MEDEVAC Concepts of Operations.<b>Almand A, Ko SY, Anderson A, Keller RJ, Zero M, Anderson AP, Laws JM, Lehnhardt K, Easter BD. <i>A qualitative investigation of space exploration medical evacuation risks</i>. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2023; 94(12):875-886.</b></p>","PeriodicalId":7463,"journal":{"name":"Aerospace medicine and human performance","volume":"94 12","pages":"875-886"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Qualitative Investigation of Space Exploration Medical Evacuation Risks.\",\"authors\":\"Austin Almand, Sam Y Ko, Arian Anderson, Ryan J Keller, Michael Zero, Allison P Anderson, Jonathan M Laws, Kris Lehnhardt, Benjamin D Easter\",\"doi\":\"10.3357/AMHP.6262.2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>INTRODUCTION:</b> Exploration beyond low Earth orbit requires innovative solutions to support the crew medically, especially as the opportunity for timely evacuation to Earth diminishes. This includes assessing the risks and benefits that a complicated medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) poses to the injured crewmember, the crew, and the mission. This qualitative study identifies common MEDEVAC risk assessment principles used in spaceflight and other extreme environments to better inform future risk assessment tools and exploration mission concepts.<b>METHODS:</b> Semistructured interviews were conducted with subject matter experts in spaceflight and analog domains, including polar operations, undersea operations, combat medicine, and mountaineering. Transcripts were analyzed using the qualitative method of Thematic Analysis with the technique of consensus, co-occurrence, and comparison.<b>RESULTS:</b> Subject matter experts described 18 themes divided into two main categories: Primary Risk Considerations (e.g., crew, mission, resources, time) and Contributing Factors (e.g., psychological considerations, medical preparation, politics).<b>DISCUSSION:</b> Primary Risk Considerations can assess MEDEVAC risk across mission phases, with Contributing Factors acting as premission tools to adjust those risks. Inter- and intracategory connections identified medical support considerations, MEDEVAC support considerations, and philosophy as the most impactful Contributing Factors. Medical support considerations, psychological considerations, and political considerations were found to have unique aspects given the distances and societal impact of exploration vs. low Earth orbit spaceflight. The Contributing Factor theme of decision making was determined to be unique due to its impacts across both categories. These findings expand current considerations and are important inputs for exploration mission MEDEVAC Concepts of Operations.<b>Almand A, Ko SY, Anderson A, Keller RJ, Zero M, Anderson AP, Laws JM, Lehnhardt K, Easter BD. <i>A qualitative investigation of space exploration medical evacuation risks</i>. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2023; 94(12):875-886.</b></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aerospace medicine and human performance\",\"volume\":\"94 12\",\"pages\":\"875-886\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aerospace medicine and human performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.6262.2023\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aerospace medicine and human performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.6262.2023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:低地球轨道以外的探索需要创新的解决方案来为乘员提供医疗支持,尤其是在及时撤离到地球的机会越来越少的情况下。这包括评估复杂医疗后送(MEDEVAC)对受伤机组人员、机组人员和任务带来的风险和益处。本定性研究确定了在太空飞行和其他极端环境中使用的常见 MEDEVAC 风险评估原则,以便更好地为未来的风险评估工具和探索任务概念提供信息。方法:对太空飞行和模拟领域(包括极地行动、海底行动、战斗医学和登山运动)的主题专家进行了半结构式访谈。结果:主题专家描述了 18 个主题,分为两大类:讨论:主要风险考虑因素可以评估 MEDEVAC 在各任务阶段的风险,而促成因素则是调整这些风险的任务前工具。类别间和类别内的联系表明,医疗支持考虑因素、MEDEVAC 支持考虑因素和理念是影响最大的促成因素。鉴于探索与低地球轨道航天飞行的距离和社会影响,医疗支持考虑因素、心理考虑因素和政治考虑因素被认为具有独特的方面。决策这一促成因素主题因其对两个类别的影响而被认为是独一无二的。这些发现拓展了当前的考虑因素,是探索任务医疗后送行动概念的重要输入。太空探索医疗后送风险的定性调查。Aerosp Med Hum Perform.2023; 94(12):875-886.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Qualitative Investigation of Space Exploration Medical Evacuation Risks.

INTRODUCTION: Exploration beyond low Earth orbit requires innovative solutions to support the crew medically, especially as the opportunity for timely evacuation to Earth diminishes. This includes assessing the risks and benefits that a complicated medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) poses to the injured crewmember, the crew, and the mission. This qualitative study identifies common MEDEVAC risk assessment principles used in spaceflight and other extreme environments to better inform future risk assessment tools and exploration mission concepts.METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with subject matter experts in spaceflight and analog domains, including polar operations, undersea operations, combat medicine, and mountaineering. Transcripts were analyzed using the qualitative method of Thematic Analysis with the technique of consensus, co-occurrence, and comparison.RESULTS: Subject matter experts described 18 themes divided into two main categories: Primary Risk Considerations (e.g., crew, mission, resources, time) and Contributing Factors (e.g., psychological considerations, medical preparation, politics).DISCUSSION: Primary Risk Considerations can assess MEDEVAC risk across mission phases, with Contributing Factors acting as premission tools to adjust those risks. Inter- and intracategory connections identified medical support considerations, MEDEVAC support considerations, and philosophy as the most impactful Contributing Factors. Medical support considerations, psychological considerations, and political considerations were found to have unique aspects given the distances and societal impact of exploration vs. low Earth orbit spaceflight. The Contributing Factor theme of decision making was determined to be unique due to its impacts across both categories. These findings expand current considerations and are important inputs for exploration mission MEDEVAC Concepts of Operations.Almand A, Ko SY, Anderson A, Keller RJ, Zero M, Anderson AP, Laws JM, Lehnhardt K, Easter BD. A qualitative investigation of space exploration medical evacuation risks. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2023; 94(12):875-886.

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
Aerospace medicine and human performance
Aerospace medicine and human performance PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
22.20%
发文量
272
期刊介绍: The peer-reviewed monthly journal, Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance (AMHP), formerly Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, provides contact with physicians, life scientists, bioengineers, and medical specialists working in both basic medical research and in its clinical applications. It is the most used and cited journal in its field. It is distributed to more than 80 nations.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信