No abstract

Introduction This study seeks to determine if modified Battlefield Acupuncture is more effective at relieving acute extremity pain, reducing medication use, and improving quality of life than placebo acupuncture or standard care after lower extremity surgery. Methods We conducted a multi-site 3-arm randomized, double-blind controlled trial of standard care alone versus standard care + placebo auricular acupuncture with semi-permanent needles versus standard care + modified battlefield acupuncture with semi-permanent needles for lower extremity surgery at two Air Force hospitals. Subjects reported pain level immediately after acupuncture, 24, 48, 168, and 720 hours later to a blinded research associate. Additionally, subjects completed a PIQ-6 30 days post-operatively, and opioid use was tracked for 30 days post-operatively. Results Two hundred thiry-three subjects >18 years old (92 females and 141 males) with a mean age of 44.5 years were randomized with 81 randomized to modified BFA, 74 randomized to placebo acupuncture, and 78 randomized to standard care. Overall pain levels were unchanged at each time point between groups. Outcomes showed unchanged pain, opioid and quality of life between groups. Conclusion The use of modified battlefield acupuncture protocol does not change pain opioid use or quality of life in those with lower extremity surgery.

This study provides a morphometric analysis of the aorta in a male population, demonstrating consistency of length and diameter while defining distinct axial zones. Findings suggest that center line aortic distances correlate with a simple, external measure of torso extent. Morphometric study of the aorta using CT data may facilitate the development and implementation of occlusion techniques to manage noncompressible torso, pelvic, and junctional femoral hemorrhage.

In our swine model of cardiac arrest, chest compressions over the left ventricle improved hemodynamics and resulted in a greater proportion of animals with ROSC and survival to 60 minutes.

This manuscript aims to determine if there is a difference in performance outcomes after initial training with either animals or simulators. Volunteers without prior experience performing emergency procedures were randomly assigned to receive training in cricothyroidotomy on either a pig model or on an artificial simulator. Volunteers were given identical lectures and trained to proficiency. Two weeks after training, trainees were tested using human cadavers as to their performance with time, incision size, incision start location, initial placement attempt, and final accuracy. Overall success rate of the animal-trained group was 64 per cent and in the artificial simulator group, 73 per cent ( P = 0.431). Median time to completion in the animal group and artificial simulator group was 143 s and 105 s ( P = 0.482), and incision lengths 4.0 cm and 3.2 cm ( P = 0.173), respectively. Accuracy of initially attempted incision placement and final cricothyroidotomy tube placement was also compared. Initially attempted site accuracy in the animal-trained group was 93 per cent and correct final position 79 per cent, and in the artificial group, 100 per cent ( P = 0.452) and 88 per cent ( P = 0.782), respectively. There was no statistically significant, objective difference in any metric between animal- and simulator-trained groups after cricothyroidotomy training. For initial training, there is no objective benefit of animal training.