Suchergebnisse

INTRODUCTION: Prehospital haemorrhage control has saved thousands of lives in the military over the last decade. While uncontrolled haemorrhage is a leading cause of preventable injury death in the USA for individuals under 45, military prehospital haemorrhage control techniques have not fully translated to the civilian sector in the USA. The effective implementation of haemorrhage control for civilian prehospital trauma is dependent on a more complex array of system and personnel-level factors than the military. OBJECTIVE: This protocol describes the methodology of a scoping review on haemorrhage control strategies in the prehospital setting; specifically, education, logistics and implementation of these strategies. The aim of the review is to identify research gaps and create recommendations for future research surrounding prehospital layperson haemorrhage control. METHODS: The protocol uses the framework published by The Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey and O'Malley, while following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Review Protocols guidelines. The search strategy was refined with the help of a medical librarian. Three peer-reviewed databases (EMBASE, PubMed and Web of Science), databases dedicated to grey literature sources, and reference mining will be used. Two investigators will independently screen and extract data. Discrepancies will be resolved by a third investigator. The extracted data will undergo descriptive analysis of the contextual data and a quantitative analysis using the appropriate statistical methods. In addition, this search strategy will be supplemented by a grey literature search. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. This scoping review will serve to highlight existing gaps within the literature to guide further research and develop future strategies to improve prehospital haemorrhage management. The results of this review will be presented at relevant national and ...

Importance Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military's medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society–designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori–defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance The National STB Research Consensus Conference identified and prioritized a national research agenda to support laypersons in reducing preventable deaths due to life-threatening hemorrhage. Investigators and funding agencies can use this agenda to guide their future work and funding priorities. ; Funding Agencies|Gillian Reny Stepping Strong Center for Trauma Innovation; National Center for Disaster Medicine and Public Health

Importance: Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military's medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective: To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review: The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society-designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings: Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori-defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance: The National STB Research Consensus ...