To Örebro University

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage from truncal and junctional injuries is responsible for the vast majority of potentially survivable deaths in combat casualties, causing most of its fatalities in the prehospital arena. Optimizing the deployment of the advanced bleeding control modalities required for the management of these injuries is essential to improve the survival of severely injured casualties. This study aimed to establish consensus on the optimal use and implementation of advanced bleeding control modalities in combat casualty care.

METHODS: A Delphi method consisting of three rounds was used. An international expert panel of military physicians was selected by the researchers to complete the Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached if ≥70% of respondents agreed and if ≥70% responded.

RESULTS: Thirty-two experts from 10 different nations commenced the process and reached consensus on which bleeding control modalities should be part of the standard equipment, that these modalities should be available at all levels of care, that only trained physicians should be allowed to apply invasive bleeding control modalities, but all medical and non-medical personnel should be allowed to apply non-invasive bleeding control modalities, and on the training requirements for providers. Consensus was also reached on the necessity of international registries and guidelines, and on certain indications and contraindications for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in military environments. No consensus was reached on the role of a wound clamp in military settings and the indications for REBOA in patients with chest trauma, penetrating axillary injury or penetrating neck injury in combination with thoraco-abdominal injuries.

CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached on the contents of a standard bleeding control toolbox, where it should be available, providers and training requirements, international registries and guidelines, and potential indications for REBOA in military environments.