IntroductionFuture conflicts may have limited use of aviation-based prehospital emergency care for evacuation. This will increase the likelihood of extended evacuation timelines and an extended hold at a forward hospital care facility following the completion of damage control surgery or acute medical interventions.MethodsA three-round Delphi Study was undertaken using a panel comprising 44 experts from the UK armed forces including clinicians, logisticians, medical planners and commanders. The panel was asked to consider the effect of an extended hold at Deployed Hospital Care (Forward) from the current 2-hour timeline to +4, +8, +12 and +24 hours on a broad range of clinical and logistical issues. Where 75% of respondents had the same opinion, consensus was accepted. Areas where consensus could not be achieved were used to identify future research priorities.ResultsConsensus was reached that increasing timelines would increase the personnel, logistics and equipment support required to provide clinical care. There is a tipping point with a prolonged hold over 8 hours, after which the greatest number of clinical concerns emerge. Additional specialties of surgeons other than general and orthopaedic surgeons will likely be required with holds over 24 hours, and robust telemedicine would not negate this requirement.ConclusionsRetaining acute medical emergencies at 4 hours, and head injuries was considered a particular risk. This could potentially be mitigated by an increased forward capacity of some elements of medical care and availability of a CT scanner and intracranial pressure monitoring at over 12 hours. Any efforts to mitigate the effects of prolonged timelines will come at the expense of an increased logistical burden and a reduction in mobility. Ultimately the true effect of prolonged timelines can only be answered by close audit and analysis of clinical outcomes during future operations with an extended hold.
Objectives University Hospitals Birmingham's (UHB) Foundation Doctors should log clinical incidents via the Trust's incident reporting system. Anecdotal reports suggest under-reporting is commonplace. It is therefore important to identify the proportion of Foundation Year 1 (FY1s) who witnessed but did not report incidents and identify and weigh perceived barriers to reporting. We can then suggest strategies to address these barriers and repeat our data collection. Methodology We performed an analysis of anonymised data from the Trust's Datix Incident Reporting system alongside an anonymised survey to determine the proportion of FY1s witnessing reportable clinical incidents, and the proportion successfully reporting an incident in the 2017/18 academic year. The survey also gathered data on FY1 perceptions of barriers to reporting. We went on to discuss our results with UHB management and suggested several strategies to improve reporting, prior to repeating data collection for the 2019–20 academic year. Results 36.4% FY1 doctors surveyed in 2017–18 reported witnessing at least one clinical incident that they did not report. 37.0% FY1 doctors surveyed in 2019–20 reported the same. Respondents felt time taken to complete forms and system complexity were the key barriers to reporting. Conclusion Results show that over a third of FY1s at UHB had witnessed but not reported at least one clinical incident each year. The evidence-based strategies suggested to the trust in 2018 and 2020 included FY1 education on incident reporting, early senior clinician involvement in the reporting pathway, and a streamlined reporting system integrated with existing infrastructure. These have not been implemented.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.