行动中的分类:战术战斗伤亡护理中大规模伤亡管理的一种基于原则的方法。

Q3 Medicine
Michael A Remley, Stacy A Shackelford, Stephen C Rush, Ricky C Kue, Jake Brown, Andrew Schaffrinna, Eric J Koch, Jonathan Stringer, Harold R Montgomery, Travis G Deaton
{"title":"行动中的分类:战术战斗伤亡护理中大规模伤亡管理的一种基于原则的方法。","authors":"Michael A Remley, Stacy A Shackelford, Stephen C Rush, Ricky C Kue, Jake Brown, Andrew Schaffrinna, Eric J Koch, Jonathan Stringer, Harold R Montgomery, Travis G Deaton","doi":"10.55460/ZC6P-YS4G","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current triage practices in military mass casualty (MASCAL) events are frequently misaligned with real-world operational needs, leading to delays, confusion, and suboptimal outcomes. Despite the existence of formal triage systems, field responders often default to simplified methods that emphasize speed, clarity, and survivability. This review supports the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) recommended transition to a principles-based, two-pass triage system optimized for Role 1 prehospital environments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multi-modal analysis incorporating retrospective case reviews, field surveys, and doctrinal review was conducted to evaluate real-world triage practices across recent military MASCAL incidents. Findings were synthesized to develop an updated triage methodology anchored in clinical judgment, tactical relevance, and operational simplicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 93% of reviewed MASCAL cases, formal triage tools involving color-coded tags and five-category algorithms were not used. Responders preferred a binary or simplified categorization (e.g., urgent vs. nonurgent) for rapid decision-making. The proposed two-pass system includes an initial \"first pass\" to identify casualties requiring immediate life-saving intervention and a more deliberate \"second pass\" to sort casualties into urgent, priority, or routine categories aligned with established evacuation precedence. This model emphasizes rapid assessment via the Massive Hemorrhage, Airway, Respirations, Circulation, Hypothermia/Head Injury (MARCH) framework, clear communication between medical and nonmedical personnel, and dynamic re-evaluation as conditions evolve.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The principles-based two-pass triage model offers a practical and operationally aligned framework for Role 1 casualty care. It improves decision-making, communication, and casualty flow during complex MASCAL events while enhancing training, interoperability, and mission success. This approach is endorsed by CoTCCC and integrated into the 2025 TCCC guidelines to optimize outcomes across the full spectrum of military operations.</p>","PeriodicalId":53630,"journal":{"name":"Journal of special operations medicine : a peer reviewed journal for SOF medical professionals","volume":" ","pages":"127-131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Triage in Action: A Principles-Based Approach to Mass Casualty Management in Tactical Combat Casualty Care.\",\"authors\":\"Michael A Remley, Stacy A Shackelford, Stephen C Rush, Ricky C Kue, Jake Brown, Andrew Schaffrinna, Eric J Koch, Jonathan Stringer, Harold R Montgomery, Travis G Deaton\",\"doi\":\"10.55460/ZC6P-YS4G\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current triage practices in military mass casualty (MASCAL) events are frequently misaligned with real-world operational needs, leading to delays, confusion, and suboptimal outcomes. Despite the existence of formal triage systems, field responders often default to simplified methods that emphasize speed, clarity, and survivability. This review supports the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) recommended transition to a principles-based, two-pass triage system optimized for Role 1 prehospital environments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multi-modal analysis incorporating retrospective case reviews, field surveys, and doctrinal review was conducted to evaluate real-world triage practices across recent military MASCAL incidents. Findings were synthesized to develop an updated triage methodology anchored in clinical judgment, tactical relevance, and operational simplicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 93% of reviewed MASCAL cases, formal triage tools involving color-coded tags and five-category algorithms were not used. Responders preferred a binary or simplified categorization (e.g., urgent vs. nonurgent) for rapid decision-making. The proposed two-pass system includes an initial \\\"first pass\\\" to identify casualties requiring immediate life-saving intervention and a more deliberate \\\"second pass\\\" to sort casualties into urgent, priority, or routine categories aligned with established evacuation precedence. This model emphasizes rapid assessment via the Massive Hemorrhage, Airway, Respirations, Circulation, Hypothermia/Head Injury (MARCH) framework, clear communication between medical and nonmedical personnel, and dynamic re-evaluation as conditions evolve.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The principles-based two-pass triage model offers a practical and operationally aligned framework for Role 1 casualty care. It improves decision-making, communication, and casualty flow during complex MASCAL events while enhancing training, interoperability, and mission success. This approach is endorsed by CoTCCC and integrated into the 2025 TCCC guidelines to optimize outcomes across the full spectrum of military operations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of special operations medicine : a peer reviewed journal for SOF medical professionals\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"127-131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of special operations medicine : a peer reviewed journal for SOF medical professionals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55460/ZC6P-YS4G\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of special operations medicine : a peer reviewed journal for SOF medical professionals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55460/ZC6P-YS4G","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:当前军事大规模伤亡事件(MASCAL)的分类实践经常与现实世界的操作需求不一致,导致延误、混乱和次优结果。尽管存在正式的分类系统,但现场响应者通常默认采用简化的方法,强调速度、清晰度和生存能力。该综述支持战术战斗伤亡护理委员会(CoTCCC)的建议,即过渡到一种基于原则的、针对第一角色院前环境进行优化的双通道分诊系统。方法:采用多模式分析,包括回顾性病例回顾、实地调查和理论回顾,以评估最近军事MASCAL事件中现实世界的分诊做法。综合研究结果,开发一种更新的分诊方法,以临床判断、战术相关性和操作简便性为基础。结果:在93%的MASCAL病例中,没有使用正式的分类工具,包括颜色编码标签和五类算法。应答者更喜欢二元或简化的分类(例如,紧急与非紧急)快速决策。拟议的双通道系统包括最初的“第一通道”,以确定需要立即进行救生干预的伤亡人员,以及更深思熟虑的“第二通道”,根据既定的疏散优先顺序将伤亡人员分为紧急、优先或常规类别。该模型强调通过大出血、气道、呼吸、循环、低体温/头部损伤(MARCH)框架进行快速评估,医疗人员和非医疗人员之间的清晰沟通,以及随着病情的发展进行动态重新评估。结论:基于原则的两步分诊模型为角色1伤亡护理提供了一个实用且操作一致的框架。它改善了复杂MASCAL事件中的决策、通信和伤亡流,同时增强了训练、互操作性和任务成功。这一方法得到了CoTCCC的认可,并被纳入2025年TCCC指南,以优化所有军事行动的成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Triage in Action: A Principles-Based Approach to Mass Casualty Management in Tactical Combat Casualty Care.

Background: Current triage practices in military mass casualty (MASCAL) events are frequently misaligned with real-world operational needs, leading to delays, confusion, and suboptimal outcomes. Despite the existence of formal triage systems, field responders often default to simplified methods that emphasize speed, clarity, and survivability. This review supports the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) recommended transition to a principles-based, two-pass triage system optimized for Role 1 prehospital environments.

Methods: A multi-modal analysis incorporating retrospective case reviews, field surveys, and doctrinal review was conducted to evaluate real-world triage practices across recent military MASCAL incidents. Findings were synthesized to develop an updated triage methodology anchored in clinical judgment, tactical relevance, and operational simplicity.

Results: In 93% of reviewed MASCAL cases, formal triage tools involving color-coded tags and five-category algorithms were not used. Responders preferred a binary or simplified categorization (e.g., urgent vs. nonurgent) for rapid decision-making. The proposed two-pass system includes an initial "first pass" to identify casualties requiring immediate life-saving intervention and a more deliberate "second pass" to sort casualties into urgent, priority, or routine categories aligned with established evacuation precedence. This model emphasizes rapid assessment via the Massive Hemorrhage, Airway, Respirations, Circulation, Hypothermia/Head Injury (MARCH) framework, clear communication between medical and nonmedical personnel, and dynamic re-evaluation as conditions evolve.

Conclusion: The principles-based two-pass triage model offers a practical and operationally aligned framework for Role 1 casualty care. It improves decision-making, communication, and casualty flow during complex MASCAL events while enhancing training, interoperability, and mission success. This approach is endorsed by CoTCCC and integrated into the 2025 TCCC guidelines to optimize outcomes across the full spectrum of military operations.

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
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
×
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