Helit Nakar MD, Alex Sorkin MD, Roy Nadler MD, Avishai M. Tsur MD, Shaul Gelikas MD MBA, Guy Avital MD, Elon Glassberg MD MHA MBA, Tarif Bader MD MHA MA, Lidar Fridrich MD, Jacob Chen MD MHA MSc, and Avi Benov MD MHA
Background: Pain control in trauma is an integral part of treatment in combat casualty care. More soldiers injured on the battlefield need analgesics for pain than life-saving interventions (LSIs). Early treatment of pain improves outcomes after injury, while inadequate treatment leads to higher rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Objective: To describe the experience of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Medical Corps with prehospital use of analgesia.
Methods: All cases documented in the IDF-Trauma Registry between January 1997 and December 2019 were examined. Data collection included analgesia administered, mechanism of injury, wound distribution, and life-saving interventions performed.
Results: Of 16,117 patients, 1807 (11.2%) had at least one documented analgesia. Demographics included 91.2% male; median age 21 years. Leading mechanism of injury was penetrating (52.9%). Of injured body regions reported, 46.2% were lower extremity wounds. Most common types of analgesics were morphine (57.2%) and fentanyl (27%). Over the two decades of the study period, types of analgesics given by providers at point of injury (POI) had changed. Fentanyl was introduced in 2013, and by 2019 was given to 39% of patients. Another change was an increase of casualties receiving analgesia from 5–10% until 2010 to 34% by 2019. A total of 824 LSIs were performed on 556 patients (30.8%) receiving analgesia and no adverse events were found in any of the casualties.
Conclusions: Most casualties at POI did not receive any analgesics. The most common analgesics administered were opioids. Over time analgesic administration has gained acceptance and become more commonplace on the battlefield.
Shaul Gelikas MD MBA, Dotan Yaari MD MHA, Guy Avital MD, Or Bainhoren MD, and Avi Benov MD MHA
Background: Pain management is fundamental in the treatment of a trauma casualty. Adequate pain management is associated with decreased long-term morbidity and chronic pain. Nonetheless, pain is frequently not documented nor adequately treated in the prehospital setting, a phenomenon described as oligoanalgesia. Gender bias has been suggested as a risk factor for oligoanalgesia.
Objectives: To examine the association between casualty gender and pain management in the prehospital trauma setting.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the Israel Defense Forces Trauma Registry between 2015 and 2020. Univariable analysis followed by multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between casualty gender and pain management. For adult patients for whom gender was known, pain scores were documented.
Results: A total of 1044 casualties were included in the study; 894 (85.6%) were male. Females and males differed in several demographic and injury characteristics, including age in years (mean 36 vs. 27.6, P value < 0.001) and injury mechanism (16%% vs. 34.5% penetrating injury, P value < 0.001). Female casualties were less likely to be treated for pain (odds ratio [OR] 0.708, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.5–1, P = 0.05). However, after adjustment for various factors, including pain severity, this association was insignificant (OR 0.748, 95%CI 0.46–1.23, P = 0.25).
Conclusions: In this prehospital study, gender bias in pain management was not apparent. As women’s role on the battlefield continues to increase, further studies regarding the role of
David Segal MD MPH, Nitzan Shakarchy-Kaminsky MD MSc, Yair Zloof MD, Tomer Talmy MD, Galina Shapiro MD PHD, Irina Radomislensky BSc, Avishai M. Tsur MD MHA, Shaul Gelikas MD MBA, Erez Karp MD MHA, and Avi Benov MD MHA; Israel Trauma Group
Background: Medical organizations worldwide aim for equity and diversity in the medical profession to improve care quality. Data on whether the caregiver gender affects outcomes in the prehospital setting are essential but scarce compared to available in-hospital studies.
Objective: To analyze the rates of missed injuries in the prehospital setting and determine whether these rates were associated with the gender of the on-field physician or paramedic.
Methods: A retrospective record review was conducted, which included trauma records documented in two trauma registries, the prehospital Israel Defense Forces-Trauma Registry (IDF-TR), and the in-hospital Israeli National Trauma Registry (INTR). Missed injuries were defined as injuries documented in the INTR but not in the IDF-TR. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the association between provider’s gender and missed injuries.
Results: Of 490 casualties, 369 (75.3%) were treated by teams that included only male paramedics or physicians. In 386 (78.8%) cases, a physician was a part of the prehospital team. In all, 94 (19.2%) casualties sustained injuries that were missed by the prehospital medical team. Missed injuries were not associated with the gender of the paramedic or physician (odds ratio 1.242, 95% confidence interval 0.69–2.193).
Conclusions: No association was found between the gender of the medical provider in the prehospital setting and the rate of missed injuries. These results should encourage prehospital emergency medical systems to aim for a balanced and diverse caregiver population.