The incidence of fever in US Critical Care Air Transport Team combat trauma patients evacuated from the theater between March 2009 and March 2010.

INTRODUCTION: Most critically ill injured patients are transported out of the theater by Critical Care Air Transport Teams (CCATTs). Fever after trauma is correlated with surgical complications and infection. The purposes of this study are to identify the incidence of elevated temperature in patients managed in the CCATT environment and to describe the complications reported and the treatments used in these patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of available records of trauma patients from the combat theater between March 1, 2009, and March 31, 2010, who were transported by the US Air Force CCATT and had an incidence of hyperthermia. We then divided the cohort into 2 groups, patients transported with an elevation in temperature greater than 100.4°F and patients with no documented elevation in temperature. We used a standardized, secure electronic data collection form to abstract the outcomes. Descriptive data collected included injury type, temperature, use of a mechanical ventilator, cooling treatment modalities, antipyretics, intravenous fluid administration, and use of blood products. We also evaluated the incidence of complications during the transport in patients who had a recorded elevation in temperature greater than 100.4°F. RESULTS: A total of 248 trauma patients met the inclusion criteria, and 101 trauma patients (40%) had fever. The mean age was 28 years, and 98% of patients were men. The mechanism of injury was an explosion in 156 patients (63%), blunt injury in 11 (4%), and penetrating injury in 45 (18%), whereas other trauma-related injuries accounted for 36 patients (15%). Of the patients, 209 (84%) had battle-related injuries and 39 (16%) had non-battle-related injuries. Traumatic brain injury was found in 24 patients (24%) with an incidence of elevated temperature. The mean temperature was 101.6°F (range, 100.5°F-103.9°F). After evaluation of therapies and treatments, 80 trauma patients (51%) were intubated on a mechanical ventilator (P < .001). Of the trauma patients with documented fever, 22 (22%) received administration of blood products. Nineteen patients received antipyretics during their flight (19%), 9 received intravenous fluids (9%), and 2 received nonpharmacologic cooling interventions, such as cooling blankets or icepacks. We identified 1 trauma patient with neurologic changes (1%), 6 with hypotension (6%), 48 with tachycardia (48%), 33 with decreased urinary output (33%), and 1 with an episode of shivering or sweating (1%). We did not detect any transfusion reactions or deaths during flight. CONCLUSION: Fever occurred in 41% of critically ill combat-injured patients evacuated out of the combat theater in Iraq and Afghanistan. Fewer than 20% of patients with a documented elevated temperature received treatments to reduce the temperature. Intubation of patients with ventilators in use during the transport was the only factor significantly associated with fever. Serious complications were rare, and there were no deaths during these transports.

Prehospital interventions performed in a combat zone: a prospective multicenter study of 1,003 combat wounded.

BACKGROUND: Battlefield care given to a casualty before hospital arrival impacts clinical outcomes. To date, the published data regarding care given in the prehospital setting of a combat zone are limited. The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and efficacy of specific prehospital lifesaving interventions (LSIs; interventions that could affect the outcome of the casualty), consistent with the Tactical Combat Casualty Care paradigm, performed during the resuscitation of casualties in a combat zone. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study between November 2009 and November 2011. Casualties were enrolled as they were treated at six US surgical facilities in Afghanistan. Descriptive data were collected on a standardized data collection form and included mechanism of injury, airway management, chest and hemorrhage interventions, vascular access, type of fluid administered, and hypothermia prevention. On arrival to the military hospital, the treating physician determined whether an intervention was performed correctly and whether an intervention was not performed that should have been performed (missed LSI). RESULTS: A total of 1,003 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their mean (SD) age was 25 (8.5) years and 97% were male. The mechanism of injury was explosion in 60% of patients, penetrating in 24% of patients, blunt in 15% of patients, and burn in 0.8% of patients. The most commonly performed LSIs included hemorrhage control (n = 599), hypothermia prevention (n = 429), and vascular access (n = 388). Of the missed LSIs, 252 were identified with the highest percentage of missed opportunities being composed of endotracheal intubation, chest needle decompression, and hypotensive resuscitation. In contrast, tourniquet application had the lowest percentage of missed opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: In our prospective study of prehospital LSIs performed in a combat zone, we observed a higher rate of incorrectly performed and missed LSIs in airway and chest (breathing) interventions than hemorrhage control interventions. The most commonly performed LSIs had lower incorrect and missed LSI rates.