Objectives: To present a case report of an intraorbital training munition during combat simulation. Methods: A 36-year-old National Guardsman presented to our hospital after being struck in the right orbit with a training munition during combat exercises at Fort Carson, Colorado. The clinical findings, treatment course, and outcome of the case are discussed with review of the literature. Results: An anterior orbitotomy and retinal detachment repair was performed on the patient. The training munition was recovered through the entrance wound in the upper eyelid. At 1 month postoperative, the patient's vision was 20/20 with correction. No complications were noted. Conclusions: This case report is serves as an example of the ocular morbidity associated with training munitions as well as a reminder of the importance of compliance with protective eyewear during training exercises. While surgical excision is this case was straightforward, intraorbital foreign bodies can pose a significant surgical challenge.
Garfin B. 13(3). 51 - 55. (Journal Article)
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have placed a spotlight on screening, evaluation, and treatment of mild traumatic brain injury, otherwise known as concussion. The author presents a mass casualty case in which a Ranger company medical section assessed and managed 30 Servicemembers (SM) diagnosed with concussion. Through the process of treating these Servicemembers, a consolidated checklist was created based on existing Department of Defense, United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), and United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) guidelines. During this and subsequent clinical encounters, utilization of this checklist resulted in efficient identification of concussed personnel, appropriate treatment, and documentation.
Background: Recent efforts to improve the quality of care in the Afghanistan theater have focused on extremity compartment syndrome, a common, disabling, and costly problem. To identify opportunities to improve care, the present survey was undertaken to observe the use of two standard methods-the traditional, improvised method and the common, off-the-shelf method-for determining intracompartmental pressures in the lower extremities of combat casualties. Methods: As part of a quality of care improvement effort during Operation Enduring Freedom, all combat casualties presenting to a forward surgical team at Forward Operating Base Shank from August to November 2011 with lower-extremity major trauma were evaluated for signs and symptoms of compartment syndrome. Results: Ten casualties had pressure measurement surveyed simultaneously using both methods. A two one-sided test analysis demonstrated a mean difference of -0.13 (90% confidence interval, -0.36 to 0.096), which indicated that the methods were similar. A repeated-measures analysis yielded a p value of .72, indicating no statistical difference between the methods. The receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated excellent agreement within the prespecified limits (±2mm Hg, area under the curve 1.0), which indicated that the methods were similar. Conclusion: The main finding of the quality of care effort was that clinicians received similar information from use of two standard methods for far forward measurement of pressures to detect extremity compartment syndrome. This finding may help clinicians improve the quality of care in the theater in detecting, diagnosing, and monitoring compartment syndrome.