Page 92 - JSOM Fall 2019

Interventions Performed on Multipurpose Military Working Dogs
in the Prehospital Combat Setting

A Comprehensive Case Series Report

1
1
Lauren K. Reeves, MsPH *; Alejandra G. Mora, MS ;
Amy Field, VC ; Theodore T. Redman, MD 3
2

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The military working dog (MWD) has been MWD was also deployed for the Korean and Vietnam conflicts
4
essential in military operations such as Operation Iraqi Free- and Gulf wars. War is not the only time the MWD is used;
dom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). MWDs they are also deployed for peacekeeping missions, used in the
sustain traumatic injuries that require point of injury and en US Secret Service, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the
route clinical interventions. The objective of this study was US Department of Agriculture. In the United States, the MWD
4
5
to describe the injuries and treatment military working dogs has been used most recently in OIF and OEF. At one point,
received on the battlefield and report their final disposition. there were an estimated 15,000 MWDs in the US Department
Methods: This was a convenience sample of 11 injury and of Defense inventory. 4
treatment reports of US MWDs from February 2008 to De-
cember 2014. We obtained clinical data regarding battlefield These canines are trained to detect hidden enemies and explo-
treatment from the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regi- sives, and their presence on the battlefield can convince ene-
ment (SOAR) database and supplemental operational sources. mies to surrender. The MWDs are a force multiplier in the
3,4
A single individual collected the data and maintained the data- military and are equipped with better senses than their human
3
set. The data collected included mechanism of injury, clinical counterparts. This is beneficial to Special Operations Forces
interventions, and outcomes. We reported findings as frequen- (SOF) because they seek low-tech alternatives to improve their
cies. Results: Of the 11 MWD casualties identified in this data- operational capabilities. These animals are responsible for
4
set, 10 reports had documented injuries secondary to trauma. saving lives as they selflessly risk their own, loyally serving
Eighty percent of the cases sustained gunshot wounds. The alongside their handler and unit. Miller et al. reported that
5
hindlegs were the most common site of injury (50%); however, based on personal observations by one of their retired authors,
80% sustained injuries at more than one anatomical location. the total number of deployed dogs may have been as high as
Seventy percent of cases received at least one clinical interven- 2,000 to 2,600 during OIF and OEF.
tion before arrival at their first treatment facility. The most
common interventions included trauma dressing (30%), gauze The MWDs encounter the same dangers on the battlefield as
(30%), chest seal (30%), and pain medication (30%). The sur- their human counterparts, 1,5,6 and as a result, they sustain trau-
vival rate was 50%. Conclusion: The majority of the MWD matic injuries that require medical care—at point of injury,
cases in this dataset sustained traumatic injuries, with gunshot en route, and at a treatment facility. Baker et al. evaluated
6
being the most common mechanism of injury. Most MWDs gunshot wounds (GSWs) in MWDs and reported that five of
received at least one clinical intervention. Fifty percent did not seven MWDs in their study were critical and required lifesav-
survive their traumatic injuries. ing interventions. In this study, the survival rate from gunshot
wounds was 33%. In addition, Giles et al. mentioned that the
1
Keywords: military working dog; Operation Iraqi Freedom; injuries sustained by MWDs merited blood product adminis-
Operation Enduring Freedom; combat training; combat vet- tration similar to that in humans. To our knowledge, there are
erinary care no studies simultaneously reporting multiple injury patterns,
prehospital treatment, and outcomes to date. Also, there have
been no reports on the treatment MWDs received secondary
to explosion-related injuries or analgesia received. Miller et
Introduction
al. reported that explosion or blast was the cause of death for
5
The military working dog (MWD) has proved to be essential 26.1% of the 92 MWDs included in their study. We seek to

1-4
to military operations throughout history. Historical ev- provide the first comprehensive case series reporting the mul-
idence of the use of dogs during conflict dates back to the tiple injury types sustained and the interventions rendered to
Persians, Greeks, Assyrians, Babylonians, Peloponnesian, MWDs in the prehospital combat setting. The objective of this
4
and Corinthians. There were an estimated 75,000 MWDs in study was to describe the injuries, prehospital clinical inter-
World War I, with European countries running MWD train- ventions, and outcomes of traumatically injured MWDs in the
ing schools leading up to that conflict. Moving forward, the prehospital combat setting.
*Correspondence to lauren.k.reeves.ctr@mail.mil
1 Ms Reeves and Ms Mora are affiliated with the Air Force En Route Care Research Center, 59th MDW/ST-US Army Institute of Surgical Re-
3
2
search, San Antonio, TX. MAJ Field is affiliated with the US Army Institute of Surgical Research. LTC Redman is an assistant professor of
military and emergency medicine, F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, USUHS and affiliated with the 160th Special Operations Aviation
Regiment (Airborne).
90