Spaceflight Medical Evacuation Risk Assessment Principles - A Qualitative Investigation
BACKGROUND Future human space exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will require innovative solutions in many areas, primarily those that provide direct medical support to crew on long-duration missions and optimize their health and performance. The associated challenges therein will be numerous, including but not necessarily limited to extended one-way or "asynchronous" communication delays, minimal to non-existent resupply, and a prolonged transit time to "definitive care" ranging from 3-days to 9-months. At the same time, long-duration exploration spacecraft and crew will face restrictions on mass, power, volume, and data far more significant than that seen in current LEO settings. Given these limitations, medical risk assessment is of primary importance, especially evaluating the implications of a medical evacuation of an ill or injured crewmember. Such evacuations are complicated, potentially dangerous, and well may be impossible in certain phases of the mission. Regardless, such issues must be weighed against the risks of the injured crew remaining aboard a spacecraft with limited medical resources. OBJECTIVE This qualitative study drew from the experiences of subject matter experts (SMEs) in spaceflight and appropriate analog environments (i.e., military, disaster, and extreme environment fields) to identify unique principles common amongst medical evacuation considerations helpful in informing future risk assessment tools. Appropriate analog environments included austere operational settings where multiple factors (weather, logistics/limited resupply, denied/extreme environments, and patient condition) resulted in a limited ability to provide definitive local medical care. The fundamental principles in question revolved around scenarios where evacuation became a complicating yet necessary consideration and where life-threatening medical concerns had to be weighed against critical mission objective(s). The primary authors collected semi-structured data gathered through in-depth interviews with 16 subject matter experts (SMEs). Interview questions investigated how these SMEs consider and weigh the attendant risks present in medical evacuation scenarios. Among the critical questions posed were those that sought to understand how the SME balanced the challenges and requirements of medical evacuation (or keeping an injured patient "on-site" aka: "prolonged field care") against the evacuation operation's risks on impacting overarching mission success. The team analyzed interview transcripts for common themes and principles using the qualitative methods of thematic analysis based on consensus, co-occurrence, and comparison. As a result, nine primary risk consideration themes and nine contributing factor themes emerged, all of which will ideally inform future medical evacuation decision-making tools and operational decision-making for exploration class missions. Specific aims for this study included: 1. Identification of common principles used to assess risks and benefits of medical evacuations in extreme environments 2. Identification of common points of friction or complication and challenges in extreme environment evacuations