Professional Soldiers

Professional Soldiers (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Vital Signs (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Training Medics (Ft. Bragg) (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40591)

swatsurgeon 01-16-2013 10:29

Training Medics (Ft. Bragg)
 
"Thousands of goats per year will be spared now that lawmakers have passed a law ending the killing of goats for Army medical training.
For years, Fort Bragg has shot, blown up and otherwise killed some 300 goats per month to train Army medics for treating wounded soldiers, according to the Fayetteville Observer. Documents show Fort Bragg's Army Special Operations Command requested up to 3,600 goats last year. Animal activists claim the goats are shot, stabbed, bludgeoned and blown up to simulate the types of injuries those in combat face, according to the newspaper.
But the new law appears to be the end of the practice, which angered animal rights activists. Instead, medics may train on humans wearing "organ suits," which have simulated human organs, breakable synthetic bones and even bloodlike fluid.
The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act requires the Department of Defense to provide plans by March to replace animals that are currently used for medical training, The Fayetteville Observer reported.
Officials with the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School and Army Special Operations Command wouldn't tell the newspaper how they plan to replace animals or say how many are killed during training."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/15...#ixzz2I9m6yXlf

This is going to impact the education of battle ready medics. Simulation, which is a great adjunct to educating medical providers can only do so much to prepare you for live tissue injury. Hopefully the DoD can find a 'quiet' alternative.

Stay tuned....this is a significant hurt to their education and readiness preparation for advanced medical care....IMHO

ss

Oldrotorhead 01-16-2013 14:05

I have a question. I have been told by a MD (former SF but not a medic) that if the goat dies the Medic fails. I don't think this is correct but have no information either way. Is this a fact? I have sone a web search but found no answer.

Surgicalcric 01-16-2013 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldrotorhead (Post 483140)
I have a question. I have been told by a MD (former SF but not a medic) that if the goat dies the Medic fails. I don't think this is correct but have no information either way. Is this a fact? I have sone a web search but found no answer.

Depends if the medic's in/actions led to the patient's demise.

Doc Diego 01-16-2013 14:26

As a former instructor at MedLab, if your goat died because of something you did or failed to do, you were a "no go". Depending on the circumstances, a student could be recycled or reclassified.

Oldrotorhead 01-16-2013 14:31

Thank you both for your response.

Red Flag 1 01-16-2013 20:05

edit

Kyobanim 01-16-2013 20:07

Maybe you could use PETA members instead. Just sayin. . .

MR2 01-16-2013 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyobanim (Post 483232)
Maybe you could use PETA members instead. Just sayin. . .

Too scrawny...

NurseTim 01-16-2013 20:24

PETA members are scrawny and fragile. Not really a good approximation of a human.

11Ber 01-16-2013 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by MR2 (Post 483234)
Too scrawny...

Plus the mounting to establish dominance, as seen in male caprines, could turn into a pleasurable experience for the male PETA types. Oh wait, that's cool in the Army now too....

Eagle5US 01-16-2013 21:27

Read the ALARACT day before yesterday...much of the article is a sensationalized wash. The requirements aren't "exactly" as spelled out in the article (big surprise) - but it mandates a report to Congress this year on "potential alternatives in the years ahead", with a "plan for phasing in alternate technology by 2017".

There are many different POV's WRT the article's characterization of utilizing non human patient models. Simulators are good for some things, living breathing models are better for others.
The anatomy of a patient model is (obviously) no where near that of a human or human simulator, but neither are the physiologic responses, the temp / textures / consistencies of tissue / nerve stimulation etc of a simulator those of a living patient model.

Some issues we have had with our new 18D's when taking them to a cadaver lab is that they really DON'T KNOW what / where / how to actually "do" procedures on a human because they have exclusively done them on a non-human patient model. So, in that regard, a human simulator or cadaver adjunct then becomes a significant positive.
There is, however, a tremendous LACK of urgency it seems when they are dealing with simulators due to the video game mentality - "oh well, if he dies we can just start over"-

The military is fast transitioning from a fighting force compelled to defend the Nation and provide the best to it's troops into something that is damn near unrecognizable to those of us who have earned our grey hair while serving.

And yes, RASCON (here at Campbell) uses simulators but it is for TCCC and CLS as well as pre-deployment unit training for units that would otherwise not be authorized use of patient models anyway.

Besides - why is Pippin a CARDIOLOGIST - leading the charge against trauma medicine? The argument that "medical schools have transitioned to simulators" is apples to oranges because guess what - doctors work on LIVING BREATHING PATIENTS throughout their intern and residency years. Our soldier medical education programs do not have the convenience of that extended patient experience.

FMF DOC 01-17-2013 12:45

Did some Training in Virginia and we used live pigs.

Flagg 01-17-2013 16:55

First post in this subforum.

Eagle Edit

That's disappointing to here.

Personally, I feel I've received some good quality basic medical training and while I haven't had to treat anyone in combat, I have been first responder on a number of occasions.

I have to admit that what scared me FAR more than jumping out of airplanes(especially for the first time) and dealing with a few naughty armed people, was dealing with a motorcycle accident victim with a tension pneumothorax.

Real live patients are a lot different than the training simulators I've used.

Without having the opportunity for live tissue training, I think I got a tiny slice of why it's probably so important.

MtnGoat 01-18-2013 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle5US (Post 483250)
Read the ALARACT day before yesterday...much of the article is a sensationalized wash. The requirements aren't "exactly" as spelled out in the article (big surprise) - but it mandates a report to Congress this year on "potential alternatives in the years ahead", with a "plan for phasing in alternate technology by 2017".

There are many different POV's WRT the article's characterization of utilizing non human patient models. Simulators are good for some things, living breathing models are better for others.
The anatomy of a patient model is (obviously) no where near that of a human or human simulator, but neither are the physiologic responses, the temp / textures / consistencies of tissue / nerve stimulation etc of a simulator those of a living patient model.

Some issues we have had with our new 18D's when taking them to a cadaver lab is that they really DON'T KNOW what / where / how to actually "do" procedures on a human because they have exclusively done them on a non-human patient model. So, in that regard, a human simulator or cadaver adjunct then becomes a significant positive.
There is, however, a tremendous LACK of urgency it seems when they are dealing with simulators due to the video game mentality - "oh well, if he dies we can just start over"-

The military is fast transitioning from a fighting force compelled to defend the Nation and provide the best to it's troops into something that is damn near unrecognizable to those of us who have earned our grey hair while serving.

And yes, RASCON (here at Campbell) uses simulators but it is for TCCC and CLS as well as pre-deployment unit training for units that would otherwise not be authorized use of patient models anyway.

Besides - why is Pippin a CARDIOLOGIST - leading the charge against trauma medicine? The argument that "medical schools have transitioned to simulators" is apples to oranges because guess what - doctors work on LIVING BREATHING PATIENTS throughout their intern and residency years. Our soldier medical education programs do not have the convenience of that extended patient experience.

82nd has a medical training center that has patient simulators, and IMO they suck!!! We tried to use them three times, and with different models, and they all take long to respond to what the medics imputs into the computer. They may give some "good" patient simulations, but nothing close to a goat or pig. I guess they are good for "regular" units, but when we are out of touch with MEDEVACs and out on our own, they don't justice.

Just my .02

Jgood 01-18-2013 15:07

LTT some of the best training I have had, very sad day when and if this training gets taken away.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:12.


Copyright 2004-2021 by Professional Soldiers