首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Rescue and Disaster Medicine >Resident And Faculty Involvement In Tactical Emergency Medical Support: A Survey Of U.S. Emergency Medicine Residency Programs
【24h】

Resident And Faculty Involvement In Tactical Emergency Medical Support: A Survey Of U.S. Emergency Medicine Residency Programs

机译:居民和教职工参与战术紧急医疗支持:对美国紧急医疗驻留计划的调查

获取原文
       

摘要

Introduction: Tactical Emergency Medical Support (TEMS) is defined as "comprehensive out-of-hospital medical support of law enforcement tactical teams during training and special operations," We attempted to determine faculty and resident physician involvement with TEMS at U.S. E.M. residencies. Methods: A 12 question email-based survey was sent to all 126 accredited E.M. Response data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: 82 programs replied to the email survey, for a response rate of 65%. Of these 51% and 28% reported faculty and resident involvement with TEMS respectively. 37% of TEMS-affiliated programs reported using TEMS opportunities as a residency-recruitment tool. Nine programs expressed an interest in developing TEMS opportunities within their residencies within the next 1 - 3 years. The most frequently cited advantages of TEMS exposure were community service, improved interactions with law enforcement, and expanded educational opportunities within emergency medicine. The most frequently cited disadvantages were time commitments, expense, and the hazardous nature of TEMS. Several program directors responded that TEMS offered no advantages, and one felt that TEMS conflicted with "sound physician ethics." Conclusions: More than half of responding programs report current faculty involvement in TEMS, and another 11% expressed interest in developing TEMS at their institutions. As such, it appears that resident education opportunities in TEMS will continue to increase. However, it is clear even within the respondents that strong negative feelings exist towards TEMS. Abstract Presented at the 2004 BTLS International Trauma Conference. Chicago IL October 2004. Introduction The origins of modern tactical emergency care arguably date back to 1792 and the work of Baron Dominique Jean Larrey, Surgeon-General to Napoleon's Army of the Rhine [1]. In addition to developing the guiding principles of modern field triage, Larrey developed a dedicated corps to treat and evacuate casualties during battle. At Konigsberg, Larrey personally led the ambulance volantes into the field. Unfortunately, this innovative approach was not adopted in the United States, and in 1862, approximately 3000 wounded troops were left untreated for 3 days during the second battle of Bull Run [1].By Vietnam, the concept of casualty care under fire and rapid evacuation and resuscitation, coupled with appropriate field triage, help reduce mortality rates to 1%, down from 4.7% in World War 2 [2]. Despite both advances in military casualty care and the development of civilian law enforcement tactical units, little thought was provided towards dedicated medical care under fire in the civilian setting. In a survey of special weapons and tactics (SWAT) teams operating in the 200 largest U.S. metropolitan areas, 69% of unit commanders indicated that casualty care was managed by civilian ambulance crews on stand-by in a secure location [3]. In 94% of cases, prehospital care providers had no specialty training and were unable to enter the so-called “hot-zone”. During the Columbine tragedy, tactical operators were forced to extract victims to a more secure location for EMS triage and treatment [4]. Tactical emergency medical support (TEMS) has been defined as “comprehensive out-of-hospital medical support of law enforcement tactical teams during training and special operations” [5]. The first formal TEMS training course was held in 1989, and co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department and the National Tactical Officer's Association [6]. Since that time, there has been a tremendous growth in the field, including the development of the Department of Defense-endorsed Counter Narcotics Tactical Operations Medical Support Program (CONTOMS), numerous private TEMS training programs at the national and international levels, and the development of the emergency medical technician – tactical (EMT-T) standard [7,8,9,10]. TEMS has become an integrated aspect o
机译:简介:战术紧急医疗支持(TEMS)定义为“在训练和特殊行动期间,执法战术团队的综合医院外医疗支持,”我们试图确定教职工和驻地医师在美国驻地人员中参与TEMS的情况。方法:将12个问题基于电子邮件的调查问卷发送给所有126个经过认证的E.M.使用描述性统计数据对答复数据进行分析。结果:82个程序回复了电子邮件调查,回复率为65%。在这51%和28%中,分别报告了教职员工和居民参与TEMS。报告称,有37%的TEMS附属计划使用TEMS机会作为居住招募工具。九个计划表示有兴趣在未来1-3年内在其驻地内开发TEMS机会。 TEMS暴露最常被提及的优势是社区服务,改善与执法部门的互动以及扩大急诊医学领域的教育机会。最常被提及的缺点是时间投入,费用和TEMS的危险性。几位计划主管回答说TEMS没有提供任何优势,而一位则认为TEMS与“健全的医生道德”相抵触。结论:超过一半的响应计划报告了当前教师参与TEMS的情况,另有11%的人表示有兴趣在其机构中开发TEMS。因此,TEMS中的居民教育机会似乎将继续增加。但是,即使在受访者中也很明显,人们对TEMS存在强烈的负面情绪。摘要在2004年BTLS国际创伤大会上发表。 2004年10月,伊利诺伊州芝加哥市。导言现代战术紧急护理的起源可以追溯到1792年,是莱茵河拿破仑军队总干事多米尼克·让·拉里男爵(Baron Dominique Jean Larrey)的工作[1]。除了制定现代野外分流的指导原则外,Larrey还组建了一支专门的队伍来治疗和撤离战斗中的人员伤亡。在Konigsberg,Larrey亲自带领救护车志愿者进入战场。不幸的是,这种创新方法并未在美国采用,1862年,在公牛奔跑的第二场战斗中,约有3000名受伤的士兵在3天之内未得到治疗。疏散和复苏,再加上适当的现场分类,有助于将死亡率从第二次世界大战中的4.7%降低到1%[2]。尽管在军事人员伤亡护理和民用执法战术单位方面都取得了进步,但对于在民用环境中遭受火灾的专门医疗服务却丝毫没有考虑。在对美国200个最大都市区中的特种武器和战术(SWAT)团队进行的一项调查中,有69%的单位指挥官表示,伤亡护理是由平民救护人员在安全地点待命进行的[3]。在94%的病例中,院前护理提供者未接受过专业培训,因此无法进入所谓的“热区”。在哥伦拜恩惨案中,战术操作员被迫将受害者送往更安全的地点进行EMS分类和治疗[4]。战术紧急医疗支持(TEMS)被定义为“在训练和特殊行动期间,执法战术团队的综合医院外医疗支持” [5]。首次正式的TEMS培训课程于1989年举行,由洛杉矶警长部门和美国国家战术官协会共同赞助[6]。自那时以来,该领域取得了巨大的发展,包括国防部批准的禁毒禁毒战术行动医疗支持计划(CONTOMS)的开发,国家和国际层面的众多私人TEMS培训计划以及紧急医疗技术人员的战术标准(EMT-T)[7、8、9、10]。 TEMS已成为一个综合方面

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号