Abstract:Introduction: In recent conflicts, the Joint Theater Trauma System (JTTS) led the systematic approach to improve battlefield trauma care, substantially contributing to the unprecedented survival of combat casualties. The Joint Trauma System (JTS) was codified in 2016 to preserve the lessons learned and functions of the JTTS, including the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. Concurrently, Combatant Commands (CCMD) were directed to establish CCMD Trauma Systems (CTS) "modeled after the JTTS" and to maintain a baseline of core functions intended to rapidly scale as needed. The complex nature of both CCMDs and the military trauma system has challenged the full implementation of the CTS. Analyzing the historical experiences of the JTTS, JTS, and CTS within a military doctrinal framework might enable the further success of the military trauma system. Methods: The strategic, operational, and tactical levels of warfare, in accordance with Joint Publication 1-0, Doctrine of the Armed Forces of the United States, and Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations, established the analytic framework for this study. The literature regarding the JTTS, CTS, and JTS was reviewed for relevant information concerning organizational structure and functions of trauma system performance improvement (PI) capabilities. A comprehensive analysis was performed using a thematic approach to evaluating descriptive data contained within the collected data set. Deployed trauma system PI tasks, functions, and responsibilities were identified, defined, and correlated according to the respective levels of warfare. Results: The comprehensive analysis revealed both discrete and overlapping tasks, functions, and responsibilities of the trauma system PI capabilities at each of the three levels of warfare. Strategic-level actions were categorized according to 12 distinct themes: reduce mortality; strategic reporting; centralized trauma registry; strategic communications; centralized organization; direct support to CCMDs; Department of Defense policy and doctrine; strategic-level PI; clinical practice guidelines; training and readiness standards; force structure, standardization, and interoperability; and research and development. Operational-level actions were categorized according to seven distinct themes: theater trauma system policies and requirements; theater trauma system leadership; stakeholder coordination; theater communication; theater standards for readiness and skill sustainment; trauma system planning; and medical logistics support. Tactical-level actions were categorized according to seven distinct themes: trauma system personnel; PI; documentation enforcement and patient care data collection; tactical planning recommendations for employing medical assets; research support; communication and reporting; and training and skills sustainment. Conclusion: The deployed U.S. military trauma system requires a robust PI capability to optimize combat casualty care. Policy updates, a joint military trauma system doctrine, and force design updates are necessary for deployed military trauma system PI capabilities to function optimally across all levels of warfare.

Military-Civilian Integration as a Tool to Bolster Mass Casualty Incident Response Globally

Addressing Differences in Knowledge and Experience in Trauma Care Capabilities Among an International Team of Military Medical Care Providers in a Deployed Setting

Military-Civilian Partnership to Improve Combat Casualty Care Readiness Among Non-physician Providers

Analysis of the U.S. Military Trauma System in Accordance With Doctrinal Levels of Warfare

Quality of Integration of Air Force Trauma Surgeons Within the Center for Sustainment of Trauma and Readiness Skills, Cincinnati: A Pilot Study

Integrated military and civilian partnerships are necessary for effective trauma-related training and skills sustainment during the inter-war period

Limitations of Triage in Military Mass Casualty Response: A Case Series

How Conflict Zone Trauma Stabilization Points Translate to the Resource Constrained MCI Response

Evaluation of military trauma system practices related to damage-control resuscitation

The National Capital Region HKIA attack response: A course of action for optimizing casualty receiving systems in the Military Health System

Sudden-Onset Disaster Mass-Casualty Incident Response: A Modified Delphi Study on Triage, Prehospital Life Support, and Processes

International Trauma Capacity Building Programs: Modernizing Capabilities, Enhancing Lethality, Supporting Alliances, Building Partnerships, and Implementing Reform

A trauma expert consensus: Capabilities are required early to improve survivability from traumatic injury

Impact of Trauma System Structure on Injury Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Transforming US Army trauma care: an evidence-based review of the trauma literature

A systematic review on integrated care for traumatic brain injury, mental health, and substance use

Improved Casualty Depiction System for Simulated Mass Casualty Exercises

Minimum data set harmonization in the management of cross-border Multi Casualty Incidents. Modified Delphi (VALKYRIES-H2020 project)

Military medical surge capacity in times of war and natural disaster

Two teams, one mission: A study using EMS units in hospital triage during active-shooter and other mass-casualty events

Collaborative Interprofessional Health Science Student Led Realistic Mass Casualty Incident Simulation