Are U.S. Soldiers Dying From Survivable Wounds? – WSJ

In an unassuming building in suburban Washington, a team of military medical specialists spent six months poring over autopsies of 4,016 men and women who had died on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. They read reports from the morgue at Dover Air Force Base, where bodies arrived in flag-draped coffins. They examined toxicology reports.…

In an unassuming building in suburban Washington, a team of military medical specialists spent six months poring over autopsies of 4,016 men and women who had died on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

They read reports from the morgue at Dover Air Force Base, where bodies arrived in flag-draped coffins. They examined toxicology reports. They winced at gruesome photos of bullet wounds and shredded limbs. In each case, the doctors pieced together the evidence to determine the exact cause of death.

Their conclusion would roil U.S. military medicine: Nearly a quarter of Americans killed in action over 10 years—almost 1,000 men and women—died of wounds they could potentially have survived. In nine out of 10 cases, troops bled to death from wounds that might have been stanched. In 8%, soldiers succumbed to airway damage that better care might have controlled. “Obviously one death or one bad outcome is too many, but there are a lot of them,” said one of the researchers, John Holcomb, a former commander of the U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research.

The findings appeared in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery in 2012 to almost no public attention. But in military medical circles, they have fueled a behind-the-scenes controversy that rages to this day over whether American men and women are dying needlessly—and whether the Pentagon is doing enough to keep them alive.

via Are U.S. Soldiers Dying From Survivable Wounds? – WSJ.

A very disturbing article.

Are some soldiers dying from survivable wounds?

Of course.

I suspect that the tactical situation in some incidents listed here had a direct influence on the outcome.  Rapid evacuation isn’t always possible. Or sometimes, your buddy simply can’t get to you to treat you. Or worse, no one realizes at first that you are wounded.

Just since 2001, the military has made great strides in improving the immediate lifesaving care provided by buddy care, Combat Lifesaver care, medics, and evacuation teams, to say nothing of the advances in trauma medicine at frontline hospitals, and the expeditious evacuation of critically wounded to definitive care hospitals in Germany and the US.

But there is always room for improvement. I suspect the percentage they quote is quite high. But the Army has a moral obligation to continue to strive to shrink that number.

Tags:

  1. Esli

    Although sad news, I am very hesitant to second-guess what constitutes survivable. As you rightly state, the tactical situation has everything to do with it. I can’t seem to read the original article and I hope that they caveated appropriately.

    Like

  2. Buck Buchanan

    The Golden Hour has always been critical to survivable.

    Whiole I mourn the loss of ewven 1 Soldier I am glad to see the success rate has grown so high.

    I am also glad to see AMEDD is not resting on its laurels but AAR-ing to get the fatality rate to as close to zero as possible.

    Like

  3. SFC Dunlap 173d RVN

    Even with the then expansive “Dustoff” improvements in aeromedical evacuation, vast improvements have come to the fore. In body armor capabilities alone wounds that would have killed in Viet-Nam are far more survivable. While not bulletproof and not to cast doubt, it was widely known the most “ballsy” Army aviators were the Dustoff folks…front AND back crews (salute).

    Like

Leave a comment