<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The Israeli Defense Forces Medical Corps (IDF-MC) implemented the use of low-titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) as the first-choice resuscitation fluid in the IDF airborne Combat Search and Rescue Unit (IDF-CSAR) for aerial evacuation of both military and civilian casualties in June 2018 for injured patients with hemorrhagic shock and at least one of the following: systolic blood pressure &#x3c;90 mm Hg, heart rate &#x3e;130 beats/min, deterioration of consciousness without head injury or hemoglobin concentration ≤7 g/dL. <b><i>Method:</i></b> All casualties treated with LTOWB by IDF-CSAR providers from June 2018 to January 2021 were included. Demographic and prehospital treatment data were collected in order to check compliance and adherence to the IDF-MC guidelines. This is a follow-up retrospective report. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Overall, 1,608 LTOWB units were supplied to the IDF-CSAR during the study period. Of these, 33 were transfused to 27 casualties; 17 (69%) with blunt injury, 8 (29.6%) with penetrating injuries, and 1 (3.7%) with gastrointestinal bleeding without trauma. The leading cause of injury was motor vehicle accidents. A total of 23 casualties received 1 unit of LTOWB, 3 received 2 units and 1 patient received 4 units. Two casualties were children. The median heart rate was 120 beats/min, 8 (29.6%) casualties had heart rates &#x3e;130 beats/min. Median systolic blood pressure was 95 mm Hg, 7 (26%) casualties had blood pressure &#x3c;90 mm Hg. The median Glasgow Coma Score was 14. No adverse reactions were documented following the administration of LTOWB. 77.8% of patients received LTOWB in adherence to the guidelines. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Appropriate administration of LTOWB has improved over time in IDF-CSAR. Using LTOWB is feasible and simpler than administering packed red blood cells and plasma concurrently. Further efforts are needed to introduce LTOWB in other prehospital and in-hospital scenarios, with an increase in the maximum antibody titer threshold, to meet the expected increase in demand.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Several tools have been proven to predict the need for massive transfusion in trauma casualties, yet tools that are easily applicable in the prehospital setting for predicting the need for any blood product transfusion in the emergency department (ED) are lacking. Methods A retrospective analysis of the cross‐referenced Israeli Defense Forces Trauma Registry and the Israeli National Trauma Registry databases was performed to identify predictors for any blood product transfusion in the ED. A scoring system was developed after internally validating the prediction model. Division to risk groups was performed. Results Seven variables (systolic blood pressure, heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation, trunk involvement, mechanism of injury, chest decompression, and tourniquet application) were included in the scoring system, ranging from 0 to 11.5. Risk groups for ED transfusion included very low (0.8%), low (3.2%), intermediate (8.5%), and high (31.2%) risk. Conclusion A scoring system for predicting the need for any blood product transfusion in the ED was developed, based on information readily available in the early stages of prehospital resuscitation, allowing the receiving medical facility to prepare for that need.

BACKGROUND:Early pain treatment following injury has been shown to improve long-term outcomes, while untreated pain can facilitate higher posttraumatic stress disorder rates and worsen outcomes. Nonetheless, trauma casualties frequently receive inadequate analgesia.In June 2013, a new clinical practice guideline (CPG) regarding pain management was introduced in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Medical Corps, recommending oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) and low-dose intravenous (IV)/intramuscular ketamine. The purpose of this study was to examine trends in prehospital pain management in the IDF. METHODS:All cases documented in the IDF trauma registry between 2008 and 2020 were examined. This study compared casualty parameters before and after the introduction of analgesia CPG in 2013. Parameters compared included demographics, injury parameters, treatment modalities, and types of analgesia provided. RESULT:Overall, 5,653 casualties were included in our study. During the 6 years before the introduction of the CPG, 289 (26.7%) of 1,084 casualties received an analgesic treatment, compared with 1,578 (34.5%) of 4,569 casualties during the 7 years following (p < 0.001). Since its introduction, OTFC was administered to 41.8% of all casualties who received analgesia and became the most used analgesic drug in 2020 (61.1% of casualties receiving analgesia). The rate of IV morphine significantly decreased after 2013 (22.6-16%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Pain management has become more common in trauma patients' prehospital care in the IDF in recent years. There has been a significant increase in analgesia administration, with the increased use of OTFC, along with a significant reduction in the use of IV morphine. These results may be attributed to introducing a pain management CPG and implementing OTFC among medical teams. The perception of OTFC as a safe user-friendly analgesic may have contributed to its use by medical providers, increasing analgesia rates overall.

BACKGROUND:Opioids are the most commonly used analgesics in acute trauma, but are limited by slow onset and significant adverse effects. Ketamine is an effective and widely used analgesic. This study was aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and opioid-sparing effects of ketamine when used in prehospital military trauma setting. METHODS:A retrospective analysis of a prehospital military trauma registry between 2014 and 2020. Inclusion criteria were 16 years or older, two or more documented pain assessments, at least one indicating severe pain, and administration of opioids and/or low-dose ketamine. Joint hypothesis testing was used to compare casualties who received opioids only to those who received ketamine on outcomes of pain score reduction and opioid consumption. RESULTS:Overall, 382 casualties were included. Ninety-one (24%) received ketamine (21 as a single analgesic), with a mean dose of 29 mg (standard deviation, 11). Mean reduction in pain scores (on an 11-point scale) was not significantly different; 4.3-point (2.8) reduction in the ketamine group and 3.7 points (2.4) in the opioid-only group ( p = 0.095). Casualties in the ketamine group received a median of 10 mg (interquartile range, 3.5-25) of morphine equivalents (MEs) compared with a median of 20 ME (10, 20) in the opioid-only group. In a multivariable multinomial logistic regression, casualties in the ketamine group were significantly more likely to receive a low (1-10 ME) rather than a medium (11-20 ME) dose of opioids compared with the opioid-only group (odds ratio, 0.032; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.75). CONCLUSION:The use of ketamine in the prehospital military setting as part of a pain management protocol was associated with a low rather than medium dose of opioids in a multivariable analysis, while the mean reduction in pain scores was not significantly different between groups. Using ketamine as a first-line agent may further reduce opioid consumption with a similar analgesic effect.

BACKGROUND:Lifesaving interventions (LSIs) are the hallmark of medical care in trauma casualties, reducing mortality and morbidity. Analgesia is another essential treatment, which has been shown to improve outcomes and decrease long-term complications. However, oligoanalgesia is common, and information regarding its relation to the performance of LSIs is scarce. The purpose of this study was to assess the relation between the performance of LSIs and analgesia administration in the prehospital environment. METHODS:A retrospective database-based study was performed, including all trauma casualties treated by Israeli Defense Forces physicians and paramedics during 2006 to 2017 and admitted to hospitals participating in the Israeli National Trauma Registry. Included LSIs were tourniquet application, administration of tranexamic acid and freeze-dried plasma, and administration of chest decompression. Casualties treated with endotracheal intubation or cricothyroidotomy were excluded. RESULTS:In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, LSIs were associated with prehospital analgesia administration (odds ratio [OR], 3.59; confidence interval [CI], 2.56-5.08; p < 0.001). When assessing for the different LSIs, tourniquet application (OR, 2.83; CI, 1.89-4.27; p < 0.001) and tranexamic acid administration (OR, 4.307; CI,; p < 0.001) were associated with prehospital analgesia administration. CONCLUSION:A positive association exists between performance of LSIs and administration of analgesia in the prehospital environment. Possible explanations may include cognitive and emotional biases affecting casualty care providers.

Introduction The incidence of blast injuries on the battlefield has risen over the last several decades. In order to improve prevention and treatment, it is essential to understand the severity and bodily distribution of these injuries. This study aims to characterize blast injury patterns among IDF fatalities. Materials and Methods This is a descriptive, retrospective study on postmortem reports of military-blast fatalities between the years 1982 and 2021. Body regions injured according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) were described. The frequency of body region injury combinations was mapped, and the correlation between injured body regions was calculated using Pearson’s coefficient. Analysis of a subgroup with a postmortem computed tomography (CT-PM) or autopsy was performed, describing severe (AIS ≥ 3) injury patterns. Results Overall, 222 fatalities suffered from blast injury, with most injuries affecting the upper and lower extremities (63.7% and 66.5%, respectively), followed by the head (57.1%) and the thorax (56.6%). The median number of injured body regions was 4 (interquartile range, 2-5). The most frequent injury combinations were the upper and lower extremities (51%), the upper extremities and the thorax (45%), and the lower extremities and the thorax (41%). In all, 47/222 (21.2%) fatalities had a documented autopsy or CT-PM report. Among the fatalities with CT-PM or autopsy, the head (63.8%) and the thorax (57.4%) were most frequently severely injured (AIS ≥ 3). Conclusions Among blast fatalities in the military setting, the extremities were most commonly injured. However, data suggest that the head and thorax are more likely to sustain severe blast injuries resulting in mortality. Blast injuries in this cohort were characterized by concomitant involvement of several regions. Development of protective gear to minimize the multisystem injuries inflicted by blast injuries is warranted and should be focused on distinct types and anatomical distribution of severe blast injuries as reported in this study. Level of Evidence Level III, Retrospective analysis.