Abstract:Background: Military-civilian partnerships (MCP) provide a bidirectional exchange of information and trauma best practices. In 2021, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center and the U.S. Navy signed a 3-year memorandum of understanding to embed active duty trauma providers into the Trauma Division to facilitate the training and sustainment of combat casualty care (CCC) skills. To date, there is little evidence to demonstrate the efficacy of military-civilian partnerships in maintaining combat casualty readiness in non-physician trauma providers. Methods: We evaluated the impact of combat casualty readiness for non-physician providers by mapping clinical experiences in an urban Level I trauma center against the Defense Health Agency's Joint Trauma Systems (JTS) Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG). The JTS CPGs provide best practices for CCCand highlight the critical skills providers need to know before deploying to an austere environment. Patient acuity data and specific JTS CPG skills performed by a non-physician providers were collected in their respective specialties for each patient seen between January 2023 to January 2024. Analyses were performed using descriptive statistics via Redcap. Results: A sample of 6 Navy personnel in different specialties: 1 Physician Assistant, 3 Registered Nurses (emergency medicine, perioperative, critical care), and 2 corpsmen (scrub tech and search & rescue/prehospital medic) completed 1299 records on patients treated. In all, 685 (52.7%) were trauma patients and 614 (47.3%) were non-trauma patients. Categories of injuries seen, listed from the most frequent to the least, were as follows: Other (764), Falls (250), Motor Vehicle Crashes (164), Gunshot Wound (126), Stab-related injuries (41). Category 1 skills, defined as "essential to know," were performed in 921 (36.1%) of the patients treated. In Category 2, skills described as "important to know" were performed in 889 (34.8%) of the patients treated. Category 3 skills, identified as "less urgent" as they are rare among trauma patients, were performed in 486 (19.0%) of the patients treated, and 252 (9.8%) required none of the JTS CPG skills. These categories were further broken down based on the frequency of the skills performed. Analysis revealed strengths and identified opportunities to direct clinical experience for underperforming skills. Conclusion: Military-civilian partnerships support CCC readiness. The data presented and the continuation of mapping personnel's clinical experience to military CPGs can gauge readiness in non-physician trauma providers. Notably, several skills in each category were identified as opportunities to modify the clinical exposure of the military provider. These findings indicate that modifications in clinical assignments could enhance active duty combat casualty readiness in these critical skills.

The Tägerwilen II report: Recommendations from the NATO Prehospital Care Improvement Initiative Task Force

[Terror attacks : Recommendations for cooperation between police, hospitals and non-police security services]

Advancing the scientific study of prehospital mass casualty response through a Translational Science process: the T1 scoping literature review stage

Enhancing Prehospital Care During the Conflict in Ukraine: NATO's Role in Global Health Engagement

Challenges, opportunities, and priorities for tier-1 emergency medical services (EMS) development in low- and middle-income countries: A modified Delphi-based consensus study among the global prehospital consortium

[Nationwide implementation of a hospital resource register for daily trauma care, mass casualties and disasters : Position paper of the German Trauma Society and the Federation of German Medical Directors of Emergency Medical Services]

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

Efficacy and outcomes of a highland prehospital trauma response team

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

Evaluation of Prehospital Undertriage in Relation to Trauma Team Activation—Results from a Prospective Study in 12 Level one German Trauma Centers

Blood far forward: A cross-sectional analysis of prehospital transfusion practices in the Canadian Armed Forces

Pre-hospital and early in-hospital management of severe injuries: Changes and trends

Tactical Combat Casualty Care in the Light of Current Information

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the acute resuscitation, initial patient evaluation, imaging, and management research gap Delphi survey

Trauma-informed Care Training in Trauma and Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Existing Curricula

Pre-hospital management of penetrating neck injuries: derivation of an algorithm through a National Modified Delphi

Review article: Pre-hospital trauma guidelines and access to lifesaving interventions in Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand

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

Neue Empfehlungen zur Schwerverletzten-Versorgung: die Novellierung der S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-BehandlungNew Recommendations for the Care of Severely Injured Patients: Revision of the S3 Guideline on Treatment of Polytrauma/Severe Injuries

Improving communication during damage control surgery: a survey of adult major trauma centres in England

The Current Status and Challenges of Prehospital Trauma Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review