Appropriate pain management indicates the quality of casualty care in trauma. Gender bias in pain management focused so far on the patient. Studies regarding provider gender are scarce and have conflicting results, especially in the military and prehospital settings.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of health care providers’ gender on pain management approaches among prehospital trauma casualties treated by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) medical teams.

This retrospective cohort study included all trauma casualties treated by IDF senior providers from 2015-2020. Casualties with a pain score of zero, age under 18 years, or treated with endotracheal intubation were excluded. Groups were divided according to the senior provider’s gender: only females, males, or both female and male. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess the odds ratio of receiving an analgesic, depending on the presence of a female senior provider, adjusting for potential confounders. A subgroup analysis was performed for “delta-pain,” defined as the difference in pain score during treatment.

A total of 976 casualties were included, of whom 835 (85.6%) were male. Mean pain scores (SD) for the female only, male only, and both genders providers were 6.4 (SD = 2.9), 6.4 (SD = 3.0), and 6.9 (SD = 2.8), respectively (P = .257). There was no significant difference between females, males, or both female and male groups in analgesic treatment, overall and per specific agent. This remained true also in the multivariate model. Delta-pain difference between groups was also not significant. Less than two-thirds of casualties in this study were treated for pain among all study groups.

This study found no association between IDF Medical Corps providers’ gender and pain management in prehospital trauma patients. Further studies regarding disparities in acute pain treatment are advised.

According to US military data, airway obstruction is the third leading cause of possibly preventable death in combat. In the absence of law enforcement-specific medical training, military experience has been translated to the law enforcement sector. The purpose of this study was to determine whether airway obstruction represents a significant cause of possibly preventable death in police officers, and whether current military combat lifesaver training programs might have prevented these fatalities.

De-identified, open-source US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Report Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) data for the years 1998-2007 were reviewed. Cases were included if officers were on duty at the time of fatal injury and died within one hour from time of wounding from penetrating face or neck trauma. After case identification, letters requesting autopsy reports were sent to the departments of victim officers. Reports were abstracted into a Microsoft Excel database.

During the study period, 42 of 533 victim officers met inclusion criteria. Departmental response rate was 85.7%. Autopsy reports were provided for 29 officers; 23 (54.8%) cases remained in the final analysis. All officers died from gunshot wounds. No coroner specifically identified airway obstruction as either a direct cause of death or contributing factor. Based upon autopsy findings, three of 341 officers possibly succumbed to airway trauma (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.0%-1.9%). Endotracheal intubation was the most common advanced airway management technique utilized during attempted resuscitation.

The limited LEOKA data suggests that acute airway obstruction secondary to penetrating trauma appears to be a rare cause of possibly preventable death in police officers. Based upon the nature of airway trauma, nasopharyngeal airways would not be expected to be an effective lifesaving intervention. This study highlights the requirement for a comprehensive mortality and “near miss” database for law enforcement officers.

FisherL, CallawayD, SztajnkrycerM. Incidence of Fatal Airway Obstruction in Police Officers Feloniously Killed in the Line of Duty: A 10-Year Retrospective Analysis. Prehosp Disaster Med.2013;28(5):1-5.

Vital signs (VS) data collected in prehospital care and recorded in trauma registries are often missing or unreliable as it is difficult to record dynamic changes while performing resuscitation and stabilization. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that analysis of continuous vital signs improves data quality, and predicts life-saving interventions (LSI) better than use of retrospectively compiled Trauma Registry (TR) data.

After Institutional Review Board approval, six emergency medical services helicopters were equipped with a Vital Signs Data Recorder (VSDR) to capture continuous VS from the patient onto a handheld personal digital assistant (PDA). Prehospital LSIs (fluid bolus, cardiopul-monary resuscitation, drugs, intubation, etc.) and those performed within two hours after arrival in the trauma resuscitation unit were considered outcome variables. The VSDR and TR data were compared using Bland-Altman method. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine which VS variable best predicted LSIs using the values in the TR and the VSDR.

Prehospital VSDR data were collected from 177 patients. There was a significant difference between the highest and lowest heart rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and oxygen saturation between the VSDR and the TR data (p <0.001).The VSDR highest heart rate and lowest oxygen saturation recorded predicted LSIs while none of the TR vital signs did so in a multivariate model. The SBP was not an independent predictor of LSI.

The VSDR data increased the odds of predicting LSIs compared to the TR data. Using continuous vital signs in prehospital care may lead to the development of better trauma prognostic models.