Page 81 - JSOM Winter 2023

communication, which can be extremely beneficial during patient handoff. However, the medical team members train
care of the patient. Perhaps even more important is that the extensively with the ground force medics and have a similar
Bluetooth headsets can allow communication with each other familiarity with their preferred patient handoff delivery com-
without the need for both personnel to be on the same ra- pared with other more common patient handoffs, such as the
dio channel. This is extremely beneficial in a patient evacu- MIST report.
ation scenario, as the medic evacuating the patient from POI
typically will have their radio set to a different frequency to Conclusion
communicate with personnel on the ground, rather than the
medical team receiving the handoff who would typically have One of the benefits of the SOF community is the use of con-
their own internal radio channel for communication. In other tinual cross-training and simulation to improve team com-
words, using Bluetooth communication removes some poten- munication and cohesiveness among all levels of care on the
tial barriers of communication between different levels of care, battlefield, from POI to damage control surgery, with contin-
allowing the medical teams to provide care more efficiently. ual efforts being made to optimize the delivery of care and
subsequent outcomes for the combat-injured. This study
Despite these advantages of Bluetooth communications, there demonstrated that Bluetooth headsets used by medical provid-
are both limitations and advantages to the technology when ers during a simulated patient handoff to a SOF medical team
compared with the other commonly used methods tested. If resulted in faster patient handoffs without sacrificing accuracy,
team members are beyond the distance of the communication thus allowing for faster time to initiation of further medical
“bubble,” they likely will not receive the transmissions when treatment. At the conclusion of the study, Bluetooth communi-
using the Bluetooth settings. According to the manufacturer’s cation was also rated as the preferred method of communica-
recommendations, this bubble has a 10-meter radius, with tion by all study participants.
3–5 meters as the optimal radius for communication, which
extends beyond the typical area of a group taking care of a Acknowledgements
11
single casualty. Furthermore, while standard radio PTT can The authors would like to thank the crew of the aircraft who
be used with an unlimited number of people within range on assisted with this study, specifically SGT Adam Reynolds and
the same channel, the Bluetooth headsets tested are limited to SGT Harold Miranda.
transmission among four people within the connected group.
However, any number of personnel within the 10-meter bub- Author Contributions
11
ble should be able to receive all transmissions. While this was DJS conducted the literature search. DJS, CM, and JAP de-
not a factor in the testing performed because of the size of the signed the study. All authors were involved in the data collec-
medical team, it could pose a limitation in communication if tion. DJS and AN analyzed the data. DJS interpreted the data.
larger medical teams are working together using the Bluetooth DJS wrote the manuscript, and CM, MB, AN, CP, HS, JK, and
headsets. However, it is also important to note that if the Blue- JAP critically revised it.
tooth function is not working, the headsets can still function
in their default mode using radio PTT or by direct plugin with Disclosures
TM-ICS. Although TM-ICS resulted in the slowest simulated The authors have no personal conflicts of interest. There was
patient handoff times, it does have the benefit of allowing any- no funding associated with this study. The opinions or asser-
one wearing a headset with an appropriate drop-down lead tions contained herein are the private views of the authors and
(NATO J11) to communicate via direct connection, without are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views
the need for being on the same radio frequency or also hav- of the Joint Special Operations Command, the Department of
ing Bluetooth-compatible headsets. Finally, the battery life is the Army, the Department of the Navy or the Department of
also shorter compared with non-Bluetooth PELTOR headsets, Defense.
which could be a factor during sustained operations or the
prolonged field care environment. 18 References
1. Kotwal RS, Howard JT, Orman JA, et al. The effect of a golden
Limitations hour policy on the morbidity and mortality of combat casualties.
This study has several limitations. The study design was set up JAMA Surg. 2016;151(1):15–24.
without allowing for the opportunity for closed-loop commu- 2. Blackbourne LH, Baer DG, Eastridge BJ, et al. Military medical
revolution: military trauma system. J Trauma Acute Care Surg.
nication. While closed-loop communication would have likely 2012;73(6 (Suppl 5)):S388–S394.
improved accuracy, albeit while sacrificing time, the decision 3. Kragh JF, Walters TJ, Baer DG, et al. Survival with emergency tour-
was made to only allow one-way transmission during the niquet use to stop bleeding in major limb trauma. Ann Surg. 2009;
study to minimize potential confounding variables. During a 249(1):1–7.
medical evacuation from POI, it is likely that the rotary-wing 4. Welch SJ, Cheung DS, Apker J, Patterson ES. Strategies for im-
aircraft would be at level 1 (blades spinning) while the study proving communication in the emergency department: Mediums
was conducted at level 2 (auxiliary power unit on). This was and messages in a noisy environment. J Comm J Qual Patient Saf.
2013;39(6):279–286.
done for safety reasons during study execution. While not as- 5. Hatzfeld JJ, Hildebrandt G, Maddry JK, et al. Top 10 research pri-
sessed during the study, the noise level difference between level orities for U.S. military en route combat casualty care. Mil Med.
1 and level 2 is approximately 5–10 decibels and likely would 2021;186(3-4):e359–e365.
have had a similar effect across all methods of communica- 6. Maddry JK, Simon EM, Reeves LK, et al. Impact of a standardized
tion studied. Finally, the casualty cards used by the SOF medic patient hand-off tool on communication between emergency med-
studied do not follow the typical MIST report framework, ical services personnel and emergency department staff. Prehosp
Emerg Care. 2021;25(4):530–538.
which could result in the medical team being unfamiliar with 7. Maddry JK, Arana AA, Clemons MA, et al. Impact of a standardized
the format of the patient handoff, resulting in both a decrease EMS handoff tool on inpatient medical record documentation at a
in accuracy and an increase in time required to complete the level I trauma center. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2021;25(5):656–663.

Bluetooth Tactical Headsets For Patient Handoff | 79