RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) operate in environments that challenge patient care, especially trauma. Military personnel often find themselves in remote settings without conventional healthcare facilities. Treating traumatic injuries, particularly hemorrhagic shock, often necessitates prehospital blood transfusion. This study aims to present an overview of the current CAF prehospital transfusion practices. Furthermore, the study compared current and developing protocols against expert-recommended guidelines. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey design was employed to describe and compare CAF prehospital blood transfusion practices and protocols against expert recommendations. Topics included protocols, equipment, and procedures. An online survey targeted medical leadership and providers within CAF, with data collected from August 15 to December 15, 2023. Results were summarized descriptively. This study received approval from the Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board (REB 23-087). RESULTS: Units and teams with prehospital blood transfusion capabilities were contacted, achieving a 100 % response rate. Within CAF, Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM), Mobile Surgical Resuscitation Team (MSRT), and Canadian Medical Emergency Response Team (CMERT) possess these capabilities, established between 2013 and 2018. These programs are crucial for military operations. CAF has access to standard blood components, cold Leuko-Reduced Whole Blood (LrWB), and factor concentrates from Canadian Blood Services (CBS), available for both domestic and international missions given adequate planning and favorable conditions. Key findings indicate high adherence to recommended practices, some variability in the transfusion process, and potential benefits of standardizing prehospital transfusion practices. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided insights into CAF's implementation of prehospital transfusion practices, highlighting high adherence to national expert recommendations and the importance of structured protocols in military prehospital trauma management. IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: CAF's approach and adoption of prehospital transfusion protocols lay a strong foundation for managing trauma patients in remote settings and for expanding prehospital transfusion capabilities across CFHS deployed assets. Further research is needed to advance military trauma care by adapting prehospital blood transfusion to dynamic tactical landscapes and evolving technologies.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Standard dose (≤ 1 g) tranexamic acid (TXA) has established mortality benefit in trauma patients. The role of high dose IV TXA (≥2 g or ≥30 mg/kg as a single bolus) has been evaluated in the surgical setting, however, it has not been studied in trauma. We reviewed the available evidence of high dose IV TXA in any setting with the goal of informing its use in the adult trauma population. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and unpublished sources from inception until July 27, 2022 for studies that compared standard dose with high dose IV TXA in adults (≥ 16 years of age) with hemorrhage. Screening and data abstraction was done independently and in duplicate. We pooled trial data using a random effects model and considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies separately. We assessed the individual study risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational cohort studies. The overall certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: We included 20 studies with a combined total of 12,523 patients. Based on pooled RCT data, and as compared to standard dose TXA, high dose IV TXA probably decreases transfusion requirements (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 0.97, moderate certainty) but with possibly no effect on blood loss (mean difference [MD] 43.31 ml less, 95% CI 135.53 to 48.90 ml less, low certainty), and an uncertain effect on thromboembolic events (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.04, very low certainty) and mortality (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.32, very low certainty). CONCLUSION: When compared to standard dose, high dose IV TXA probably reduces transfusion requirements with an uncertain effect on thromboembolic events and mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level IV.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Military Forward Aeromedical Evacuation and civilian Helicopter Emergency Medical Services are widely used to conduct Primary Aeromedical Retrieval. Crew composition in Primary Aeromedical Retrieval missions varies considerably. The ideal composition is unknown. Thus, we conducted a descriptive systematic review on mortality and other outcomes for different Primary Aeromedical Retrieval crew compositions. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched up to January 2020. Results were reported per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Studies of adult trauma air transported by different crews were included. Population, injury severity, crew composition, procedures, and outcomes, including mortality, were abstracted. Risk of bias was assessed using previously validated tools. A lack of reported effect measures precluded a quantitative analysis. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria (3 prospective studies, 1 case-control, and 12 retrospective). Overall, studies reported a mortality benefit associated with advanced health care providers. This was most apparent in patients with severe but survivable injuries. In this population, early rapid sequence induction, endotracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation, thoracostomies, blood products transfusion, and treatment of hemorrhagic shock are better performed by advanced providers and may improve outcomes. The quality of evidence reported a moderate risk of bias in the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings were divergent but showed a trend to decreased mortality in patients treated by advanced providers with interventions beyond the basic paramedic level. This trend was most significant in patients with severe but survivable injuries. These results should be cautiously interpreted because most studies were observational, had small sample sizes, and had a high potential for confounding factors.

Asunto(s)