Page 102 - 2022 Spring JSOM
P. 102

To  compare  statistics  involving  interventions  performed  on   This indicates that there were several other injuries that were
          traumas, Reeves et al. assessed interventions in the prehospital   left out of the histories in addition to hemorrhage.
          setting performed on 11 MWDs, nine of which sustained GSWs
          and three of which experienced blasts, which reflects more   The nature of the TRAC2ES data repository has several lim-
          trauma than our dataset.  Only two chest procedures were per-  itations. First, TRAC2ES only tracks regulated evacuations of
                             2
          formed in our dataset, while four were performed in their much   patients. Therefore, patients that did not survive to transport
          smaller dataset. Forty-five percent of interventions performed in   were not captured. Second, TRAC2ES only records regulated
          Reeves et al.’s study was for hemorrhage control, while only 7   transports on a medical platform. It does not capture patients
          of 104 interventions preformed for trauma in our dataset (7%)   moved by nonstandardized casualty evacuation (CASEVAC)
          were for hemorrhage. This may, again, be explained by survival   platforms. In addition, the data recorded is limited and based
          bias. Finally, 67% of the traumas in our dataset recorded some   on the free text entries which contain varying levels of detail,
          type of analgesia, while only 18% of MWDs in their report re-  as well as are at the discretion of the treating medical person-
          ceived pain medications. The differences in interventions likely   nel. This limits the information available, and we are unable
          stem from the fact that their data were performed in the prehos-  to assess data that was omitted from the history. Roles of care
          pital setting. Thirty-one percent of the traumas in our dataset   were not consistently recorded in the database, so this could
          recorded undergoing surgery, indicating that they were likely   not be analyzed. Moreover, some of the entries may have been
          in a military treatment facility already and needed to be trans-  entered by nonmedical personnel which may account for the
          ferred to a veterinary-capable facility. This means that many of   variances in details relevant to medical care.
          the prehospital interventions typically performed (hemorrhage
          dressings, chest seal, etc.) were not used. Furthermore, 50% of   Conclusion
          the MWDs in Reeves et al.’s study did not survive, while all
          MWDs in our dataset survived long enough to begin transport   Of the MWDs in our dataset, most were transported for non-
          for an encounter to be generated in TRAC2ES.       trauma. The most frequent intervention was medication ad-
                                                             ministration for both traumatic and nontraumatic injuries.
          There are no published reports discussing interventions per-  Our dataset adds to the limited body of MWD encounters in
          formed on non–traumatically-injured MWDs. Overall, our   theater.
          dataset differs greatly from previously published research, pre-
          sumably due to the differences in circumstances of where the   Acknowledgments
          data comes from – a transportation-specific data repository.   We would like to thank Mr Mark Barnes from TRANSCOM
          This report is the first of its kind in its examination of causes   for providing us with these data.
          of injury, injury patterns, and interventions performed on a
          large dataset of MWDs who survived their injuries. To this   Authorship Statement
          end, the development of an MWD-specific performance im-  SJ and CC analyzed the data. SJ and CC wrote the first draft
          provement system like the DoDTrauma Registry would greatly   of the manuscript with help from SS. LR and KB offered their
          improve the science of MWD care in theater.        expertise on the subject and guided data analysis. SS is the
                                                             principal investigator for the overall study from which these
          There are some oddities found in this research that require   data  were  derived.  All  authors  edited  the  manuscript,  read,
          further investigation. Sixty-seven percent of traumatic injuries   and approved the final manuscript.
          were to the extremities, which indicates a need for improved
          protection for MWDs. Current body protection equipment is   Conflicts of Interest
          thick and may result in overheating in MWDs, so further re-  We have no conflicts to report.
          search is required to develop lighter protective equipment that
          offers additional coverage of the limbs.  A complicating factor   Disclaimer
                                        2
          in the development of protective equipment for MWDs are the   The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and
          mechanics of the canine body.                      do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Army
                                                             Medical Department, Department of the Army, Department of
          Major differences between the anatomy of MWDs as com-  Defense, or the US Government.
          pared to humans lead to different types of injury patterns. Ad-
          ditionally, the cause of injuries differs greatly between MWDs   Funding
          and their human counterparts. This may be a simple reflection   This research was supported in part by an appointment to
          of the anatomical differences, or the result of the risk of ex-  the Student Research Participation Program at the US Army
          posure due to the varied missions (e.g., patrol versus direct   Institute of Surgical Research administered by the Oak Ridge
          action). Furthermore, much of the data on injured MWDs is   Institute for Science and Education through an interagency
          undocumented, as highlighted by the fact that 19% of trau-  agreement between the US Department of Energy and  USAISR.
          matic causes of injuries were not captured. Additionally, al-  We received no funding for this effort.
          though there were 87 reports of medication administration,
          this number is likely much higher. Several MWDs who under-  References
          went surgery had no medications listed, but it can be assumed   1.  Miller L, Pacheco GJ, Janak JC, et al. Causes of death in mili-
          that these MWDs were under sedation minimally. Seeing as   tary working dogs during Operation Iraqi Freedom and Opera-
          not all medications were  listed, it is  likely that much  more   tion Enduring Freedom, 2001–2013. Mil Med. 2018;183(9–10):
                                                               e467–e474.
          important  medical  history  is  left  out  as  well.  Additionally,   2.  Reeves  LK,  Mora  AG,  Field  A,  Redman  TT.  Interventions  per-
          many MWDs sustained GSWs (11 MWDs) or blasts (9) as   formed on multipurpose military working dogs in the prehospital
          well as other injuries that would typically result in bleeding,   combat setting: A comprehensive case series report. J Spec Oper
          but there were only nine recorded occurrences of hemorrhage.   Med. 2019;19(3):90–93.


          100  |  JSOM   Volume 22, Edition 1 / Sping 2022
   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107