战地第一响应者和战斗救生干预在角色1阶段护理的描述性分析。

Matthew W Paulson, John D Hesling, Jerome T McKay, Vikhyat S Bebarta, Kathleen Flarity, Sean Keena, Jason F Naylor, Andrew D Fisher, Michael D April, Steven G Schauer
{"title":"战地第一响应者和战斗救生干预在角色1阶段护理的描述性分析。","authors":"Matthew W Paulson,&nbsp;John D Hesling,&nbsp;Jerome T McKay,&nbsp;Vikhyat S Bebarta,&nbsp;Kathleen Flarity,&nbsp;Sean Keena,&nbsp;Jason F Naylor,&nbsp;Andrew D Fisher,&nbsp;Michael D April,&nbsp;Steven G Schauer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Battlefield first responders (BFR) are the first non-medical personnel to render critical lifesaving interventions for combat casualties, especially for massive hemorrhage where rapid control will improve survival. Soldiers receive medical instruction during initial entry training (IET) and unit-dependent medical training, and by attending the Combat Lifesaver (CLS) course. We seek to describe the interventions performed by BFRs on casualties with only BFRs listed in their chain of care within the Prehospital Trauma Registry (PHTR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of a dataset from the PHTR from 2003-2019. We excluded encounters with a documented medical officer, medic, or unknown prehospital provider at any time in their chain of care during the Role 1 phase to isolate only casualties with BFR medical care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,357 encounters in our initial dataset, we identified 29 casualties that met inclusion criteria. Pressure dressing was the most common intervention (n=12), followed by limb tourniquets (n=4), IV fluids (n=3), hemostatic gauze (n=2), and wound packing (n=2). Bag-valve-masks, chest seals, extremity splints, and nasopharyngeal airways (NPA) were also used (n=1 each). Notably absent were backboards, blizzard blankets, cervical collars, eye shields, pelvic splints, hypothermia kits, chest tubes, supraglottic airways (SGA), intraosseous (I/O) lines, and needle decompression (NDC).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite limited training, BFRs employ vital medical skills in the prehospital setting. Our data show that BFRs largely perform medical interventions within the scope of their medical knowledge and training. Better datasets with efficacy and complication data are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":74148,"journal":{"name":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","volume":" PB 8-21-07/08/09","pages":"25-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Descriptive Analysis of Battlefield First Responder and Combat Lifesaver Interventions during the Role 1 Phase of Care.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew W Paulson,&nbsp;John D Hesling,&nbsp;Jerome T McKay,&nbsp;Vikhyat S Bebarta,&nbsp;Kathleen Flarity,&nbsp;Sean Keena,&nbsp;Jason F Naylor,&nbsp;Andrew D Fisher,&nbsp;Michael D April,&nbsp;Steven G Schauer\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Battlefield first responders (BFR) are the first non-medical personnel to render critical lifesaving interventions for combat casualties, especially for massive hemorrhage where rapid control will improve survival. Soldiers receive medical instruction during initial entry training (IET) and unit-dependent medical training, and by attending the Combat Lifesaver (CLS) course. We seek to describe the interventions performed by BFRs on casualties with only BFRs listed in their chain of care within the Prehospital Trauma Registry (PHTR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of a dataset from the PHTR from 2003-2019. We excluded encounters with a documented medical officer, medic, or unknown prehospital provider at any time in their chain of care during the Role 1 phase to isolate only casualties with BFR medical care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,357 encounters in our initial dataset, we identified 29 casualties that met inclusion criteria. Pressure dressing was the most common intervention (n=12), followed by limb tourniquets (n=4), IV fluids (n=3), hemostatic gauze (n=2), and wound packing (n=2). Bag-valve-masks, chest seals, extremity splints, and nasopharyngeal airways (NPA) were also used (n=1 each). Notably absent were backboards, blizzard blankets, cervical collars, eye shields, pelvic splints, hypothermia kits, chest tubes, supraglottic airways (SGA), intraosseous (I/O) lines, and needle decompression (NDC).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite limited training, BFRs employ vital medical skills in the prehospital setting. Our data show that BFRs largely perform medical interventions within the scope of their medical knowledge and training. Better datasets with efficacy and complication data are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74148,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)\",\"volume\":\" PB 8-21-07/08/09\",\"pages\":\"25-30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"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:战场第一响应者(BFR)是对战斗伤亡人员进行关键救生干预的第一批非医务人员,特别是对大出血的快速控制将提高生存率。士兵在初始入职训练(IET)和部队相关医疗训练中接受医疗指导,并参加战斗救生(CLS)课程。我们试图描述只有在院前创伤登记处(PHTR)的护理链中列出的bfr对伤亡人员进行的干预措施。方法:这是对2003-2019年PHTR数据集的二次分析。我们排除了在角色1阶段的任何时候与有记录的医务人员、医务人员或未知的院前提供者的接触,以隔离只有BFR医疗护理的伤亡人员。结果:在我们初始数据集中的1357次遭遇中,我们确定了29例符合纳入标准的伤亡。压力敷料是最常见的干预措施(n=12),其次是肢体止血带(n=4)、静脉输液(n=3)、止血纱布(n=2)和伤口填塞(n=2)。还使用了气囊-瓣膜面罩、胸封、四肢夹板和鼻咽气道(NPA)(各n=1)。值得注意的是,没有背板、暴风雪毯、颈圈、眼罩、骨盆夹板、低温治疗包、胸管、声门上气道(SGA)、骨内(I/O)线和针头减压(NDC)。结论:尽管培训有限,但BFRs在院前环境中运用了重要的医疗技能。我们的数据显示,BFRs主要在其医学知识和培训的范围内进行医疗干预。需要更好的疗效和并发症数据集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Descriptive Analysis of Battlefield First Responder and Combat Lifesaver Interventions during the Role 1 Phase of Care.

Background: Battlefield first responders (BFR) are the first non-medical personnel to render critical lifesaving interventions for combat casualties, especially for massive hemorrhage where rapid control will improve survival. Soldiers receive medical instruction during initial entry training (IET) and unit-dependent medical training, and by attending the Combat Lifesaver (CLS) course. We seek to describe the interventions performed by BFRs on casualties with only BFRs listed in their chain of care within the Prehospital Trauma Registry (PHTR).

Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a dataset from the PHTR from 2003-2019. We excluded encounters with a documented medical officer, medic, or unknown prehospital provider at any time in their chain of care during the Role 1 phase to isolate only casualties with BFR medical care.

Results: Of the 1,357 encounters in our initial dataset, we identified 29 casualties that met inclusion criteria. Pressure dressing was the most common intervention (n=12), followed by limb tourniquets (n=4), IV fluids (n=3), hemostatic gauze (n=2), and wound packing (n=2). Bag-valve-masks, chest seals, extremity splints, and nasopharyngeal airways (NPA) were also used (n=1 each). Notably absent were backboards, blizzard blankets, cervical collars, eye shields, pelvic splints, hypothermia kits, chest tubes, supraglottic airways (SGA), intraosseous (I/O) lines, and needle decompression (NDC).

Conclusions: Despite limited training, BFRs employ vital medical skills in the prehospital setting. Our data show that BFRs largely perform medical interventions within the scope of their medical knowledge and training. Better datasets with efficacy and complication data are needed.

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
×
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