Monash University Accident Research Centre,Melbourne, Victoria,Australia.
Monash University Community Emergency Health and Paramedics,Melbourne, Victoria,Australia.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019 Aug;34(4):442-448. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X1900459X.
Terror attacks have increased in frequency, and tactics utilized have evolved. This creates significant challenges for first responders providing life-saving medical care in their immediate aftermath. The use of coordinated and multi-site attack modalities exacerbates these challenges. The use of triage is not well-validated in mass-casualty settings, and in the setting of intentional mass violence, new and innovative approaches are needed.
Literature sourced from gray and peer-reviewed sources was used to perform a comparative analysis on the application of triage during the 2011 Oslo/Utoya Island (Norway), 2015 Paris (France), and 2015 San Bernardino (California USA) terrorist attacks. A thematic narrative identifies strengths and weaknesses of current triage systems in the setting of complex, coordinated terrorist attacks (CCTAs).
Triage systems were either not utilized, not available, or adapted and improvised to the tactical setting. The complexity of working with large numbers of patients, sensory deprived environments, high physiological stress, and dynamic threat profiles created significant barriers to the implementation of triage systems designed around flow charts, physiological variables, and the use of tags. Issues were identified around patient movement and "tactical triage."
Current triage tools are inadequate for use in insecure environments, such as the response to CCTAs. Further research and validation are required for novel approaches that simplify tactical triage and support its effective application. Simple solutions exist in tactical triage, patient movement, and tag use, and should be considered as part of an overall triage system.
恐怖袭击的频率不断增加,所采用的策略也在不断演变。这给在第一时间提供救生医疗服务的急救人员带来了巨大的挑战。协同和多地点攻击模式的使用加剧了这些挑战。分诊在大规模伤亡情况下的有效性尚未得到充分验证,在故意大规模暴力事件中,需要新的创新方法。
从灰色和同行评议的来源中获取文献,对 2011 年奥斯陆/乌托亚岛(挪威)、2015 年巴黎(法国)和 2015 年圣贝纳迪诺(美国加利福尼亚州)恐怖袭击期间分诊的应用进行比较分析。主题叙述确定了在复杂协同恐怖袭击(CCTA)情况下当前分诊系统的优势和劣势。
分诊系统要么未被使用,要么无法使用,要么根据战术情况进行了调整和改进。处理大量患者、感官剥夺环境、高度生理压力和动态威胁特征的复杂性给围绕流程图、生理变量和标签使用而设计的分诊系统的实施带来了重大障碍。在患者转移和“战术分诊”方面存在问题。
目前的分诊工具在不安全环境中(如对 CCTA 的反应)不适用。需要进一步研究和验证用于简化战术分诊并支持其有效应用的新方法。在战术分诊、患者转移和标签使用方面存在简单的解决方案,应将其作为整体分诊系统的一部分加以考虑。