Jain Priya, Akhter Forhad, Schoppe Austin, Hood R Lyle, De Lorenzo Robert A
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2020 Dec;35(6):676-682. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X20001065. Epub 2020 Sep 10.
Airway management is at the forefront for combat medics dealing with battlefield trauma. For military service members, compromised airways are the second leading cause of potentially survivable death on the battlefield, accounting for one in ten preventable combat deaths. Effective suction is a critical component of airway clearance. However, currently available devices are too heavy and bulky to be carried by combat medics and are insufficiently powered. The industry has not responded to the need, with companies continuing to produce models using 1970s technology. A literature review was completed with the assistance of a librarian. The databases searched included: Biomedical Research Database (BRD), Computer Retrieval of Information of Scientific Projects (CRISP), Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP), Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), Pub Med/Medline, and OVID. Additionally, a Google Scholar search was performed to identify nonstandard sources. After screening, a total of 40 articles were used. There were no randomized controlled trials or other high-quality evidence that addressed the issues; there was limited peer-reviewed literature on the use, effectiveness, adverse effects, and safety of suction for use in combat casualty care. A review of the available literature revealed no standards, either proposed, validated, or accepted, for the safety or avoidance of adverse effects for portable suction device use in combat casualty care. Similarly, there are no accepted standards to guide the safe use and anticipated adverse effects of suction for use in prehospital combat or emergency care. Nevertheless, there are meaningful data that can be extracted from the few studies available combined with non-clinical studies, narrative reviews and case reports, and expert opinions.
气道管理是战地医护人员处理战场创伤时的首要任务。对于军人来说,气道受损是战场上潜在可避免死亡的第二大原因,每十例可预防的战斗死亡中就有一例是由气道问题导致的。有效的吸引是气道清理的关键组成部分。然而,目前可用的设备太重、体积太大,战地医护人员无法携带,而且动力不足。该行业并未回应这一需求,各公司仍在生产采用20世纪70年代技术的型号。在一位图书馆员的协助下完成了文献综述。检索的数据库包括:生物医学研究数据库(BRD)、科研项目信息计算机检索(CRISP)、联邦在研项目(FEDRIP)、国防技术信息中心(DTIC)、PubMed/Medline和OVID。此外,还进行了谷歌学术搜索以识别非标准来源。筛选后,共使用了40篇文章。没有随机对照试验或其他高质量证据来解决这些问题;关于战斗伤员护理中吸引的使用、有效性、不良反应和安全性的同行评审文献有限。对现有文献的综述表明,对于战斗伤员护理中便携式吸引装置的使用,无论是安全方面还是避免不良反应方面,都没有提出、验证或接受的标准。同样,也没有公认的标准来指导院前战斗或急救中吸引的安全使用和预期不良反应。然而,结合少量现有研究、非临床研究、叙述性综述和病例报告以及专家意见,可以提取出有意义的数据。