Evaluation of urological and gynecological surgeons as force multipliers for mass casualty trauma care.

BACKGROUND

The clinical demands of mass casualty events strain even the most well-equipped trauma centers and are especially challenging in resource-limited rural, remote, or austere environments. Gynecologists and urologists care for patients with pelvic and abdominal injuries, but the extent to which they are able to serve as "force multipliers" for trauma care is unclear. This study examined the abilities of urologists and gynecologists to perform 32 trauma procedures after mentored training by expert trauma educators to inform the potential for these specialists to independently care for trauma patients.

METHODS

Urological (6), gynecological surgeons (6), senior (postgraduate year 5) general surgery residents (6), and non-trauma-trained general surgeons (8) completed a rigorous trauma training program (Advanced Surgical Skills Exposure in Trauma Plus). All participants were assessed in their trauma knowledge and surgical abilities performing 32 trauma procedures before/after mentored training by expert trauma surgeons. Performance benchmarks were set for knowledge (80%) and independent accurate completion of all procedural components within a realistic time window (90%).

RESULTS

General surgery participants demonstrated greater trauma knowledge than gynecologists and urologists; however, none of the specialties reached the 80% benchmark. Before training, general surgery, and urology participants outperformed gynecologists for overall procedural abilities. After training, only general surgeons met the 90% benchmark. Post hoc analysis revealed no differences between the groups performing most pelvic and abdominal procedures; however, knowledge associated with decision making and judgment in the provision of trauma care was significantly below the benchmark for gynecologists and urologists, even after training.

CONCLUSION

For physiologically stable patients with traumatic injuries to the abdomen, pelvis, or retroperitoneum, these specialists might be able to provide appropriate care; however, they would best benefit trauma patients in the capacity of highly skilled assisting surgeons to trauma specialists. These specialists should not be considered for solo resuscitative surgical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.