You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Practical limitations of emergency donor panels as a risk mitigation in small-scale short-term training team operations

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Personal view
Practical limitations of emergency donor panels as a risk mitigation in small-scale short-term training team operations
  1. Simon William James Grant1 and
  2. K M Heil2
  1. 1144 Parachute Medical Squadron, 16 Medical Regiment, Colchester, UK
  2. 242 Commando, Royal Marines, Plymouth, UK
  1. Correspondence to Simon William James Grant, 16 Medical Regiment, Colchester, UK; 7059grant{at}armymail.mod.uk

Abstract

Haemostatic resuscitation with blood products has become the expected standard of care for trauma casualties. As UK Defence increases its deployment of small-scale, short-term training teams (STTTs) in Defence Engagement and influence operations, ever greater reliance is being placed on emergency donor panels (EDP) as a source of whole blood. This paper outlines the practical limitations of using EDPs as a risk mitigation in conventional STTTs which must be considered prior to every deployment.

  • blood bank & transfusion medicine
  • accident & emergency medicine
  • medical education & training

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjmilitary-2020-001529

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors SWJG and KMH both conceived the paper, it was written by SWJG with amendments and contributions from KMH.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.