Comparison of the non-mortal gunshot and handmade explosive blast traumas during a low-intensity conflict on urban terrain

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to conduct a cross-sectional data analysis involving 60 patients wounded during a low-intensity conflict on urban terrain.
Material and Methods: Data of the 60 patients wounded during a low-intensity conflict on urban terrain between September 1st, 2016, and January 15th, 2017, and transferred to our hospital after the initial medical interventions conducted in the regional hospitals were probed retrospectively. Group A consisted of 25 (41.67%) patients suffering gunshot wounds, and Group B consisted of 35 (58.33%) patients with blast trauma injuries. Their Abbreviated Injury Scale scores were compared according to the injured body compartment.
Results: In both groups, extremities were the most common site of injury (17 [50%] for Group A, 18 [33.33%] for Group B). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant for only head and neck injuries and facial injuries (p<0.05). In each group, only one body compartment was affected in 19 patients, which represented 55.88% of patients in Group A and 35.18% of patients in Group B. Injuries of three compartments concurrently occurred in 3 (8.82%) patients in Group A and 4 (7.4%) patients in Group B. None of our patients died because of their injuries.
Conclusion: Contrary to the expected, gunshot casualties were found to be more likely to suffer from extremity injuries than blast casualties did, and it should be noted that blast trauma casualties tend to have multiple compartment injuries that should not be missed. Ocular ruptures are also common, especially with blast injuries, warranting equipping the personnel with protective goggles.

Authors declared that the research was conducted according to the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki “Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects” (amended in October 2013).

Informed consent was not received due to the retrospective nature of the study.

Externally peer-reviewed.

Concept - H.E.G., S.B., A.A.A., M.E.; Design - M.E., H.E.G., S.B., A.A.A.; Supervision - M.E., H.E.G., A.A.A., S.B.; Resource - H.E.G., S.B., A.A.A., M.E.; Materials - A.A.A., S.B., H.E.G.; Data Collection and/or Processing - A.A.A., S.B., H.E.G., M.E.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - M.E., A.A.A., H.E.G., S.B.; Literature Search - H.E.G., M.E.; Writing Manuscript - H.E.G., M.E.; Critical Reviews - H.E.G., S.B., A.A.A, M.E.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.