During conflicts, people with kidney disease, either those remaining in the affected zones or those who are displaced, may be exposed to additional threats because of medical and logistical challenges. Acute kidney injury developing on the battlefield, in field hospitals or in higher-level hospital settings is characterized by poor outcomes. People with chronic kidney disease may experience treatment interruptions, contributing to worsening kidney function. Patients living on dialysis or with a functioning graft may experience limitations of dialysis possibilities or availability of immunosuppressive medications, increasing the risk of severe complications including death. When patients must flee, these threats are compounded by unhealthy and insecure conditions both during displacement and/or at their destination. Measures to attenuate these risks may only be partially effective. Local preparedness for overall and medical/kidney-related disaster response is essential. Due to limitations in supply, adjustments in dialysis frequency or dose, switching between hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis and changes in immunosuppressive regimens may be required. Telemedicine (if possible) may be useful to support inexperienced local physicians in managing medical and logistical challenges. Limited treatment possibilities during warfare may necessitate referral of patients to distant higher-level hospitals, once urgent care has been initiated. Preparation for disasters should occur ahead of time. Inclusion of disaster nephrology in medical and nursing curricula and training of patients, families and others on self-care and medical practice in austere settings may enhance awareness and preparedness, support best practices adapted to the demanding circumstances and prepare non-professionals to lend support.

Armed conflict in the 21st century poses new challenges to a humanitarian surgical response, including changing security requirements, access to patients, and communities in need, limited deployable surgical assets, resource constraints, and the requirement to address both traumatic injuries as well as emergency surgical needs of the population. At the same time, recent improvements in trauma care and systems have reduced injury-related mortality. This combination of new challenges and medical capabilities warrants reconsideration of long-standing humanitarian surgery protocols.
To describe a consensus framework for surgical care designed to respond to this emerging need.
An international group of 35 representatives from humanitarian agencies, US military, and academic trauma programs was invited to the Stanford Humanitarian Surgical Response in Conflict Working Group to engage in a structured process to review extant trauma protocols and make recommendations for revision.
The working group\'s method adapted core elements of a modified Delphi process combined with consensus development conference from August 3 to August 5, 2018.
Lessons from civilian and military trauma systems as well as recent battlefield experiences in humanitarian settings were integrated into a tiered continuum of response from point of injury through rehabilitation. The framework addresses the security and medical requirements as well as ethical and legal principles that guide humanitarian action. The consensus framework includes trained, lay first responders; far-forward resuscitation/stabilization centers; rapid damage control surgical access; and definitive care facilities. The system also includes nontrauma surgical care, injury prevention, quality improvement, data collection, and predeployment training requirements.
Evidence suggests that modern trauma systems save lives. However, the requirements of providing this standard of care in insecure conflict settings places new burdens on humanitarian systems that must provide both emergency and trauma surgical care. This consensus framework integrates advances in trauma care and surgical systems in response to a changing security environment. It is possible to reduce disparities and improve the standard of care in these settings.

暂无摘要。

Disasters and armed conflicts are often the unfortunate basis for aid projects run by Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). The nature of war and disasters means that surgery is an integral part of this medical emergency aid. In these situations, resources are usually limited. As a result, surgical work in these contexts differs significantly from the daily routine of a surgeon working in a highly resourced hospital. The principles of surgery do not change but surgeons must adapt their tactical approach to the changed context otherwise there is a high risk of failing to improve the health of patients and potentially jeopardizing their prospects for recovery. Every experienced war surgeon has learned new skills the hard way. The Field Guide to Manage Limb Injury in Disaster and Conflict has been written to help new surgeons who may face the challenges of disaster and war surgery and to avoid unnecessary suffering for patients ( https://icrc.aoeducation.org ). Under the guidance of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), with participation of the World Health Organization (WHO), financed by the AO Foundation, and featuring the experiences of experts from different organizations (amongst them MSF), the book details techniques and guidelines for surgery in low resource settings. The following article provides a short summary of some of the surgical challenges when working with limited resources and reflects on a few specific recommendations for so-called war surgery.