Page 15 - NATO Supplement

INDEPENDENT ADvISOR’S REvIEw AND REPORT n 13

testament to the rigor and accuracy of the curric- Figure 3.2 Paradigm of an NSOCM’s complement
ulum content. Although other national-level cur- of training can be visualized as a tree.
ricula are available (e.g., U.K. BATLS and ITLS),
PHTLS offers a proven international capability
with an administrative infrastructure to support National
the needs of SOF training. Variations

Following Dr. McSwain’s presentation, the SOF-
MEP was polled to determine if consensus was
possible regarding a recommendation to senior NSOCM
Curriculum
medical leadership on NSOCM curriculum stan-
dardization. All SOFMEP members agreed that MPHTLS
M-PHTLS could serve as an initial NSOCM
standardizing curriculum. However, M-PHTLS
alone would not completely meet necessary TCCC
NSOCM capability, referring to the 164 NSOCM
tasks and timeframe needed to train an SOCM
to the desired standard. Dr. Robert Sweet (USA)
contributed a visual representation of the prob- using a robust curriculum, a comparison should
lem and the potential solution. The paradigm be made between the nation’s curriculum training
of an NSOCM’s complement of training can objectives and methods, to determine interopera-
be visualized as a tree (Figure 3.2) with many bility with NATO SOF standards.
branches, each branch representing an individual
national scope of practice preferences. The con- 3.2.4 Partner Nation Training
cepts of TCCC and M-PHTLS as foundational Experiences Overview
training serve as the roots and trunk base, with The workshop had the opportunity to hear two
the trunk remainder representing the portion nation’s presentations, Australia and Norway,
of the NSOCM’s 164 tasks not included in the both with training programs for SOF medics.
M-PHTLS program. These presentations provided additional con-
text for the HFM panel members with limited
The dual panels achieved consensus in making the familiarity with SOF medical training programs.
recommendation to COMEDS that nations move Other SOF members in the audience augmented
toward developing M-PHTLS training programs discussion, providing a clearer picture of the na-
that support their SOF organizations. Where pos- ture of SOF medical training across the Alliance.
sible, a nation should leverage the already existing
PHTLS infrastructure within the nation. Nations The Partner presentations highlighted the wide
without a PHTLS program should consider part- variability between nations and national SOF
nering with nations that have an existing program. medic training capability. While there are some
Senior leaders should note that this does complete consistencies, such as TCCC as the field standard
the full complement of NSOCM training. It pro- for battlefield care, there are many differences.
vides initial interoperability and a curriculum These include the source of the medic, his skill
foundation on which to build a comprehensive level, and the origin of his training (internal or ac-
SOCM medical curriculum. For nations already crued elsewhere). Commitment to initial training