• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
A Consensus Framework for the Humanitarian Surgical Response to Armed Conflict in 21st Century Warfare.21 世纪战争中武装冲突人道外科应对的共识框架
JAMA Surg. 2020 Feb 1;155(2):114-121. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4547.
2
Applying trauma systems concepts to humanitarian battlefield care: a qualitative analysis of the Mosul trauma pathway.将创伤系统概念应用于人道主义战场护理:摩苏尔创伤救治路径的定性分析
Confl Health. 2020 Feb 4;14:5. doi: 10.1186/s13031-019-0249-2. eCollection 2020.
3
Combat casualties from two current conflicts with the Seventh French Forward Surgical Team in Mali and Central African Republic in 2014.2014年,第七法国前方外科医疗队在马里和中非共和国参与两场当前冲突时产生的战斗伤亡情况。
J R Army Med Corps. 2016 Dec;162(6):450-455. doi: 10.1136/jramc-2015-000557. Epub 2016 Jan 29.
4
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
5
Potential benefits of an integrated military/civilian trauma system: experiences from two major regional conflicts.军民一体化创伤系统的潜在益处:来自两场重大地区冲突的经验
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017 Feb 21;25(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0360-6.
6
The political and security dimensions of the humanitarian health response to violent conflict.人道主义应对暴力冲突中的卫生应对的政治和安全层面。
Lancet. 2021 Feb 6;397(10273):511-521. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00130-6. Epub 2021 Jan 24.
7
Humanitarian medical aid to the Syrian people: Ethical implications and dilemmas.向叙利亚人民提供人道主义医疗援助:伦理问题与困境。
Bioethics. 2019 Feb;33(2):302-308. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12463. Epub 2018 Jul 3.
8
Fighting with words: humanitarian security and the changing role of law in contemporary armed conflict.论争文字:人道主义安全与当代武装冲突中法律角色的转变
Disasters. 2023 Oct;47(4):870-890. doi: 10.1111/disa.12580. Epub 2023 May 1.
9
Estimating the Number of Civilian Casualties in Modern Armed Conflicts-A Systematic Review.估算现代武装冲突中的平民伤亡人数——一项系统综述
Front Public Health. 2021 Oct 28;9:765261. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.765261. eCollection 2021.
10
Global Neurosurgery Advances From Trenches to Bedside: Lessons From Neurosurgical Care in War, Humanitarian Assistance, and Disaster Response.全球神经外科学从战场到 bedside 的进展:从战争、人道主义援助和灾难应对中的神经外科护理中吸取的教训。
Mil Med. 2024 Feb 27;189(3-4):e532-e540. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usad170.

引用本文的文献

1
Perforated Meckel's diverticulum mimicking appendicitis in a 64-year-old male: a case report and comparative analysis from a resource-limited setting.一名64岁男性中表现为阑尾炎的穿孔性梅克尔憩室:来自资源有限地区的病例报告及对比分析
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2025 Jul 14;87(9):6096-6100. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000003590. eCollection 2025 Sep.
2
Synthesizing the Evidence Base to Enhance Coordination between Humanitarian Mine Action and Emergency Care for Casualties of Explosive Ordnance and Explosive Weapons: A Scoping Review.综合证据库以加强人道主义排雷行动与爆炸物及爆炸武器伤亡人员紧急护理之间的协调:范围审查
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2024 Dec;39(6):421-435. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X24000669. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
3
Navigating challenges, solutions and requirements in the provision of trauma care in conflict settings by humanitarian actors: a scoping literature review.人道主义行为体在冲突环境中提供创伤护理时面临的挑战、解决方案及要求:一项文献综述
Confl Health. 2025 Jan 17;19(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s13031-025-00643-7.
4
Defining humanitarian surgery: international consensus in global surgery.界定人道主义外科手术:全球外科领域的国际共识
Br J Surg. 2024 Jan 31;111(2). doi: 10.1093/bjs/znae024.
5
Design and Development of a Novel 3-D Printed External Fixation Device for Fracture Stabilization.一种用于骨折固定的新型3D打印外固定装置的设计与开发。
3D Print Med. 2023 Jun 14;9(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s41205-023-00179-7.
6
Strengthening the emergency health response to children wounded by explosive weapons in conflict.加强对冲突中受爆炸武器伤害儿童的紧急卫生应对。
World J Pediatr Surg. 2022 Aug 4;5(4):e000443. doi: 10.1136/wjps-2022-000443. eCollection 2022.
7
Capacity Building During Short-Term Surgical Outreach Trips: A Review of What Guidelines Exist.短期外出行医期间的能力建设:对现有指南的综述。
World J Surg. 2023 Jan;47(1):50-60. doi: 10.1007/s00268-022-06760-1. Epub 2022 Oct 10.
8
Applying the Haddon Matrix to Frontline Care Preparedness and Response in Asymmetric Warfare.将 Haddon 矩阵应用于非对称战争中的一线医护准备和应对。
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2022 Oct;37(5):577-583. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X22001066. Epub 2022 Jul 25.
9
Predicting surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings: a retrospective study.在资源匮乏的冲突环境中预测手术资源消耗和院内死亡率:一项回顾性研究。
BMC Emerg Med. 2021 Aug 11;21(1):94. doi: 10.1186/s12873-021-00488-2.
10
Counting the costs of trauma: the need for a new paediatric injury severity score.计算创伤的代价:需要一种新的儿童损伤严重程度评分
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2021 Jun;5(6):391-392. doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(21)00132-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Protecting Surgeons and Patients During Wars and Armed Conflicts: Importance of Predeployment Training on the Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law.在战争和武装冲突期间保护外科医生和患者:关于《日内瓦公约》和国际人道法的部署前培训的重要性。
JAMA Surg. 2019 Aug 1;154(8):683-684. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0041.
2
Use of Combat Casualty Care Data to Assess the US Military Trauma System During the Afghanistan and Iraq Conflicts, 2001-2017.利用作战伤员救治数据评估 2001-2017 年阿富汗和伊拉克冲突期间的美军创伤救治体系。
JAMA Surg. 2019 Jul 1;154(7):600-608. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0151.
3
Examining humanitarian principles in changing warfare.审视不断变化的战争中的人道主义原则。
Lancet. 2018 Feb 17;391(10121):631. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30256-3.
4
The effect of prehospital transport time, injury severity, and blood transfusion on survival of US military casualties in Iraq.美国在伊拉克军事人员伤亡的院前转运时间、损伤严重程度和输血对其生存率的影响。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018 Jul;85(1S Suppl 2):S112-S121. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001798.
5
Patterns of civilian and child deaths due to war-related violence in Syria: a comparative analysis from the Violation Documentation Center dataset, 2011-16.叙利亚战争相关暴力导致的平民和儿童死亡模式:2011-2016 年侵犯行为文献记录中心数据集的对比分析。
Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Jan;6(1):e103-e110. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30469-2. Epub 2017 Dec 7.
6
Humanitarian medicine is more than a technical exercise.人道医学不仅仅是一项技术活动。
Lancet. 2017 Nov 18;390(10109):2226-2228. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31352-1. Epub 2017 Jun 8.
7
A qualitative study of the challenges of providing pre-prosthetic rehabilitation in rural South Africa.一项关于在南非农村地区提供修复前康复服务所面临挑战的定性研究。
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2018 Apr;42(2):179-186. doi: 10.1177/0309364617698520. Epub 2017 Mar 20.
8
Health workers and the weaponisation of health care in Syria: a preliminary inquiry for The Lancet-American University of Beirut Commission on Syria.卫生工作者与叙利亚医疗保健的武器化:《柳叶刀》-贝鲁特美国大学叙利亚问题委员会的初步调查。
Lancet. 2017 Dec 2;390(10111):2516-2526. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30741-9. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
9
Two Decades of Saving Lives on the Battlefield: Tactical Combat Casualty Care Turns 20.二十年来在战场上拯救生命:战术战斗伤亡护理迎来20周年。
Mil Med. 2017 Mar;182(3):e1563-e1568. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00214.
10
Battlefield Tourniquets: Lessons Learned in Moving Current Care Toward Best Care in an Army Medical Department at War.战地止血带:在战争期间陆军医疗部门将当前护理提升至最佳护理过程中的经验教训。
US Army Med Dep J. 2016 Apr-Sep(2-16):29-36.

21 世纪战争中武装冲突人道外科应对的共识框架

A Consensus Framework for the Humanitarian Surgical Response to Armed Conflict in 21st Century Warfare.

机构信息

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.

US Army Institute of Surgical Research/Joint Trauma System, San Antonio, Texas.

出版信息

JAMA Surg. 2020 Feb 1;155(2):114-121. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4547.

DOI:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4547
PMID:31722004
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6865259/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Armed conflict in the 21st century poses new challenges to a humanitarian surgical response, including changing security requirements, access to patients, and communities in need, limited deployable surgical assets, resource constraints, and the requirement to address both traumatic injuries as well as emergency surgical needs of the population. At the same time, recent improvements in trauma care and systems have reduced injury-related mortality. This combination of new challenges and medical capabilities warrants reconsideration of long-standing humanitarian surgery protocols.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a consensus framework for surgical care designed to respond to this emerging need.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An international group of 35 representatives from humanitarian agencies, US military, and academic trauma programs was invited to the Stanford Humanitarian Surgical Response in Conflict Working Group to engage in a structured process to review extant trauma protocols and make recommendations for revision.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The working group's method adapted core elements of a modified Delphi process combined with consensus development conference from August 3 to August 5, 2018.

RESULTS

Lessons from civilian and military trauma systems as well as recent battlefield experiences in humanitarian settings were integrated into a tiered continuum of response from point of injury through rehabilitation. The framework addresses the security and medical requirements as well as ethical and legal principles that guide humanitarian action. The consensus framework includes trained, lay first responders; far-forward resuscitation/stabilization centers; rapid damage control surgical access; and definitive care facilities. The system also includes nontrauma surgical care, injury prevention, quality improvement, data collection, and predeployment training requirements.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Evidence suggests that modern trauma systems save lives. However, the requirements of providing this standard of care in insecure conflict settings places new burdens on humanitarian systems that must provide both emergency and trauma surgical care. This consensus framework integrates advances in trauma care and surgical systems in response to a changing security environment. It is possible to reduce disparities and improve the standard of care in these settings.

摘要

重要性

21 世纪的武装冲突对人道主义外科反应提出了新的挑战,包括不断变化的安全要求、获取患者和有需要的社区、有限的可部署外科资产、资源限制以及需要处理创伤和紧急手术需求的人口。与此同时,创伤护理和系统的最近改进降低了与伤害相关的死亡率。这种新挑战和医疗能力的结合需要重新考虑长期存在的人道主义手术方案。

目的

描述一种旨在应对这一新兴需求的外科护理共识框架。

设计、地点和参与者:邀请来自人道主义机构、美国军方和学术创伤计划的 35 名代表参加斯坦福人道主义手术应对冲突工作组,以参与结构化流程,审查现有创伤方案并提出修订建议。

主要结果和措施

工作组的方法适应了修改后的 Delphi 过程的核心要素,并结合了 2018 年 8 月 3 日至 8 月 5 日的共识发展会议。

结果

从民用和军事创伤系统以及最近人道主义环境中的战场经验中吸取的教训被整合到从受伤点到康复的分层反应连续体中。该框架解决了指导人道主义行动的安全和医疗要求以及伦理和法律原则。共识框架包括经过培训的、非专业的第一反应者;远前复苏/稳定中心;快速损伤控制性手术通道;以及确定性治疗设施。该系统还包括非创伤性外科护理、伤害预防、质量改进、数据收集和部署前培训要求。

结论和相关性

有证据表明,现代创伤系统可以拯救生命。然而,在不安全的冲突环境中提供这种护理标准的要求给人道主义系统带来了新的负担,这些系统必须提供紧急和创伤外科护理。这个共识框架整合了创伤护理和外科系统的进步,以应对不断变化的安全环境。有可能减少这些环境中的差异并提高护理标准。