Military deployment's impact on the surgeon's practice.
Journal
The journal of trauma and acute care surgery
ISSN: 2163-0763
Titre abrégé: J Trauma Acute Care Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101570622
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 08 2021
01 08 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
28
5
2021
medline:
29
9
2021
entrez:
27
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As the United States withdraws from overseas conflicts, general surgeons remain deployed in support of global operations. Surgeons and surgical teams are foundational to combat casualty care; however, currently, there are few casualty producing events. Low surgical volume and acuity can have detrimental effects on surgical readiness for those frequently deployed. The surgical team cycle of deployment involves predeployment training, drawdown of clinical practice, deployment, postdeployment reintegration, and rebuilding of a patient panel. This study aims to assess these effects on typical general surgeon practices. Quantifying the overall impact of deployment may help refine and implement measures to mitigate the effects on skill retention and patient care. Surgeon case logs of eligible surgeons deploying between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020, were included from participating military treatment facilities. Eligible surgeons were surgeons whose case logs were primarily at a single military treatment facility 26 weeks before and after deployment and whose deployment duration, location, and number of deployed cases were obtainable. Starting 26 weeks prior to deployment, analyzing in 1-week intervals toward deployment time, case count decreased by 4.8% (p < 0.0001). With each 1-week interval, postdeployment up to the 26-week mark, case count increased by 6% (p < 0.0001). Cases volumes most prominently drop 3 weeks prior to deployment and do not reach normal levels until approximately 7 weeks postdeployment. Case volumes were similar across service branches. There is a significant decrease in the number of cases performed before deployment and increase after return regardless of military branch. The perideployment surgical volume decline should be understood and mitigated appropriately; predeployment training, surgical skill retention, and measures to safely reintegrate surgeons back into their practice should be further developed and implemented. Economic/Decision, Level III.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
As the United States withdraws from overseas conflicts, general surgeons remain deployed in support of global operations. Surgeons and surgical teams are foundational to combat casualty care; however, currently, there are few casualty producing events. Low surgical volume and acuity can have detrimental effects on surgical readiness for those frequently deployed. The surgical team cycle of deployment involves predeployment training, drawdown of clinical practice, deployment, postdeployment reintegration, and rebuilding of a patient panel. This study aims to assess these effects on typical general surgeon practices. Quantifying the overall impact of deployment may help refine and implement measures to mitigate the effects on skill retention and patient care.
METHODS
Surgeon case logs of eligible surgeons deploying between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020, were included from participating military treatment facilities. Eligible surgeons were surgeons whose case logs were primarily at a single military treatment facility 26 weeks before and after deployment and whose deployment duration, location, and number of deployed cases were obtainable.
RESULTS
Starting 26 weeks prior to deployment, analyzing in 1-week intervals toward deployment time, case count decreased by 4.8% (p < 0.0001). With each 1-week interval, postdeployment up to the 26-week mark, case count increased by 6% (p < 0.0001). Cases volumes most prominently drop 3 weeks prior to deployment and do not reach normal levels until approximately 7 weeks postdeployment. Case volumes were similar across service branches.
CONCLUSION
There is a significant decrease in the number of cases performed before deployment and increase after return regardless of military branch. The perideployment surgical volume decline should be understood and mitigated appropriately; predeployment training, surgical skill retention, and measures to safely reintegrate surgeons back into their practice should be further developed and implemented.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Economic/Decision, Level III.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34039914
doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003279
pii: 01586154-202108002-00037
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
S261-S266Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Baker JB, Marc Northern MD, Frament C, Aaron Baker D, Remick K, Seery J, Stephens L, Shackelford S, Gurney J. Austere Resuscitative and Surgical Care in Support of Forward Military Operations-Joint Trauma System Position Paper. Mil Med . 2020;usaa358. ePublication.
Edwards MJ, Edwards KD, White C, Shepps C, Shackelford S. Saving the military surgeon: maintaining critical clinical skills in a changing military and medical environment. J Am Coll Surg . 2016;222(6):1258–1264.
Edwards MJ, White CE, Remick KN, Edwards KD, Gross KR. Army general surgery’s crisis of conscience. J Am Coll Surg . 2018;226(6):1190–1194.
Howard JT, Kotwal RS, Stern CA, Janak JC, Mazuchowski EL, Butler FK, Stockinger ZT, Holcomb BR, Bono RC, Smith D. Use of Combat Casualty Care Data to Assess the US Military Trauma System During the Afghanistan and Iraq Conflicts, 2001-2017. JAMA Surg . 2019;154(7):600–608.
Tadlock MD, Carr M, Diaz J, et al. How to maintain the readiness of forward deployed caregivers. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2021;90(5):e87–e94 In Press .
Walker A. The ‘Walker dip’. J R Nav Med Serv . 2018;104(3):173–176.
Hall AB, Davis E, Vasquez M, Umberger J, Tadlock MD, Qureshi I, Walker A, Glaser J, McClendon H, Gurney JM. Current challenges in military trauma readiness: insufficient relevant surgical case volumes in military treatment facilities. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2020;89(6):1054–1060.
Hall A, Qureshi I, Gurney J, Shackelford S, Taylor J, Mahoney C, Trask S, Walker A, Wilson R. Clinical utilization of deployed military surgeons. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2020;89(6):1054–1060.
Perez RS, Skinner A, Weyhrauch P, Niehaus J, Lathan C, Schwaitzberg SD, Cao CG. Prevention of surgical skill decay. Mil Med . 2013;178(10):76–86.
Yang CW, Yen ZS, McGowan JE, Chen HC, Chiang WC, Mancini ME, Soar J, Lai MS, Ma MH. A systematic review of retention of adult advanced life support knowledge and skills in healthcare providers. Resuscitation . 2012;83:1055–1060.
Aruther W, Bennett W, Stanush P, McNelly T. Factors that influence skill decay and retention: a quantitative review and analysis. Hum Perform . 1998;11(1):57–101.
Berfield K. How does the adult surgeon learn? Thorac Surg Clin . 2019;29(3):233–238.
Rhue AL, VanDerveer B. Wilderness first responder: are skills soon forgotten? Wilderness Environ Med . 2018;29:132–137.
Sitterly TE, Zaitzeff LP, Berge WA. Degradation of learned skills: effectiveness of practice methods on visual approach and landing skill retention . Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 1972:D180–D181.
Mackenzie CF, Shackelford SA, Tisherman SA, Yang S, Puche A, Elster EA, Bowyer MW. Critical errors in infrequently performed trauma procedures after training. Surgery . 2019;166(5):835–843.
Umana-Pizano JB, Nissen AP, Sandhu HK, Miller CC, Loghin A, Safi HJ, Eisenberg SB, Estrera AL, Nguyen TC. Acute type A dissection repair by high-volume vs low-volume surgeons at a high-volume aortic center. Ann Thorac Surg . 2019;108(5):1330–1336.
Ogola GO, Crandall ML, Richter KM, Shafi S. High-volume hospitals are associated with lower mortality among high-risk emergency general surgery patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2018;85(3):560–565.
Hall A, Qureshi I, Shackelford S, Glaser J, Bulger EM, Scalea T, Gurney J. Objective model to facilitate designation of military-civilian partnership hospitals for sustainment of military trauma readiness. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open . 2019;4(1):e000274.
Howard JT, Kotwal RS, Santos-Lazada AR, Martin MJ, Stockinger ZT. Reexamination of a battlefield trauma golden hour policy. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2018;84(1):11–18.
Kotwal RS, Scott LLF, Janak JC, Tarpey BW, Howard JT, Mazuchowski EL, Butler FK, Shackelford SA, Gurney JM, Stockinger ZT. The effect of prehospital transport time, injury severity, and blood transfusion on survival of US military casualties in Iraq. J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2018;85(1S Suppl 2):S112–S121.
Vicente DA, Ugochukwu O, Johnston MG, Craft C, Damin V, Tadlock MD. Preparing austere maritime surgical teams for deployment during the COVID-19 global pandemic: is it time to change the training pipeline. Mil Med . 2021;usaa574. Online ahead of print.
Grabo D, Bardes J, Sharon M, Borgstrom D. Initial report on the impact of a perfused fresh cadaver training program in general surgery resident trauma education. Am J Surg . 2020;220(1):109–113.
Hall MA, Boecker MF, Englert MZ, Hanseman D, Fields MA. Objective military trauma team performance improvement from military-civilian partnerships. Am Surg . 2018;84(12):e555–e557.
Gheorghiu A. Flight simulation in air force training. a knowledge transfer efficiency perspective. JoDRM . 2013;4(2):153–158.
Knudson M, Elster E, Hoyt D, et al. The blue book: military-civilian partnerships for trauma training, sustainment, and readiness. American College of Surgeons, 2020. Available at: facs.org/military . Accessed January 22, 2021.
Nealeigh MD, Kucera WB, Bradley MJ, Jessie EM, Sweeney WB, Ritter EM, Rodriguez CJ. Surgery at sea: exploring the training gap for isolated military surgeons. J Surg Educ . 2019;76(4):1139–1145.
Iverson K, Riojas R, Sharon D, Hall AB. Objective comparison of animal training versus artificial simulation for initial cricothyroidotomy training. Am Surg . 2015;81(5):515–518.
Kruger J, Dunning D. Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J Pers Soc Psychol . 1999;77(6):1121–1134.