Recommended medical and non-medical factors to assess military preventable deaths: subject matter experts provide valuable insights.

INTRODUCTION: Historically, there has been variability in the methods for determining preventable death within the US Department of Defense. Differences in methodologies partially explain variable preventable death rates ranging from 3% to 51%. The lack of standard review process likely misses opportunities for improvement in combat casualty care. This project identified recommended medical and non-medical factors necessary to (1) establish a comprehensive preventable death review process and (2) identify opportunities for improvement throughout the entire continuum of care. METHODS: This qualitative study used a modified rapid assessment process that includes the following steps: (1) identification and recruitment of US government subject matter experts (SMEs); (2) multiple cycles of data collection via key informant interviews and focus groups; (3) consolidation of information collected in these interviews; and (4) iterative analysis of data collected from interviews into common themes. Common themes identified from SME feedback were grouped into the following subject areas: (1) prehospital, (2) in-hospital and (3) forensic pathology. RESULTS: Medical recommendations for military preventable death reviews included the development, training, documentation, collection, analysis and reporting of the implementation of the Tactical Combat Casualty Care Guidelines, Joint Trauma System Clinical Practice Guidelines and National Association of Medical Examiners autopsy standards. Non-medical recommendations included training, improved documentation, data collection and analysis of non-medical factors needed to understand how these factors impact optimal medical care. CONCLUSIONS: In the operational environment, medical care must be considered in the context of non-medical factors. For a comprehensive preventable death review process to be sustainable in the military health system, the process must be based on an appropriate conceptual framework implemented consistently across all military services.

A large-scale, rapid public health response to rabies in an organ recipient and the previously undiagnosed organ donor.

This article describes and contrasts the public health response to two human rabies cases: one organ recipient diagnosed within days of symptom onset and the transplant donor who was diagnosed 18 months post-symptom onset. In response to an organ-transplant-related rabies case diagnosed in 2013, organ donor and recipient investigations were conducted by multiple public health agencies. Persons with potential exposure to infectious patient materials were assessed for rabies virus exposure. An exposure investigation was conducted to determine the source of the organ donor's infection. Over 100 persons from more than 20 agencies spent over 2700 h conducting contact investigations in healthcare, military and community settings. The 564 persons assessed include 417 healthcare workers [5.8% recommended for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP)], 96 community contacts (15.6% recommended for PEP), 30 autopsy personnel (50% recommended for PEP), and 21 other persons (4.8% recommended for PEP). Donor contacts represented 188 assessed with 20.2% recommended for PEP, compared with 5.6% of 306 recipient contacts recommended for PEP. Human rabies cases result in substantial use of public health and medical resources, especially when diagnosis is delayed. Although rare, clinicians should consider rabies in cases of encephalitis of unexplained aetiology, particularly for cases that may result in organ donation.