• Minrui Lv, Yijun Jia, Zhaowen Zong, Renqing Jiang, Wenqiong Du, Lin Zhang, Zhao Ye, and Xin Zhong.
• State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burn and Combined Injury, Department for Combat Casualty Care Training, Training Base for Army Health Care, Army Medical University, Chongqing 400038, China.
• Mil Med. 2022 May 3; 187 (5-6): 757763757-763.

IntroductionTraining combat personnel in combat first-aid skills has faced many challenges over time, such as the need to combine tactics with medicine and to overcome combat personnel's lack of medical background knowledge. Therefore, many simulation methods are currently being developed, each of which has its advantages and disadvantages. In this study, a combined simulation method involving live-actor patients using a wearable training apparatus was developed, and the effects of this method were observed.Materials And MethodsFocusing on the major causes of preventable deaths among victims killed in action, wearable training apparatuses simulating massive hemorrhage, airway obstruction, and tension pneumothorax were designed and produced. Methods of simulating these three injury types using live-actor patients with these training apparatuses were developed, and medical teachers evaluated the simulation effects. The live-actor patients were incorporated into a tactical scenario to train and test nonmedical and medical students in year 3, respectively. High-fidelity simulator-based training and traditional training without simulation served as the control. A post-training survey using a 7-point Likert scale evaluated the trainees' feelings toward these training approaches.ResultsThree types of training apparatuses were developed to simulate three life-threatening injuries, and the simulation effects of the live-actor patients using these apparatuses were highly recognized by medical teachers. Both live-actor patients and high-fidelity simulator-based training improved performance significantly more than traditional training. However, the improvement due to training with live-actor patients was greater than that due to high-fidelity simulator-based training for nonmedical students, whereas there was no difference between these two simulation methods for medical students. A post-training survey revealed that all the trainees were confident in practicing first-aid skills after training, and they all agreed that live-actor patients could combine tactical situations with first aid better than high-fidelity simulators. The nonmedical students strongly agreed that live-actor patients were more helpful in the training of injury evaluation than high-fidelity simulators.ConclusionsThe method using wearable training apparatus-based live-actor patients was satisfying and effective for teaching life-saving combat first-aid skills, especially for nonmedical students.© The Association of Military Surgeons of the United States 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

8 keywords...

hide…