{"id":{"repo_id":"nps","oai_identifier":"oai:calhoun.nps.edu:10945/66071"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/nps/oai:calhoun.nps.edu:10945/66071","repository":{"repo_id":"nps","name":"Naval Postgraduate School","base_url":"https://calhoun.nps.edu/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"HAS THE SUN SET ON THE GOLDEN HOUR?","abstract":"The golden hour rule'the belief that trauma patients are more likely to survive if they receive definitive care within 60 minutes of sustaining an injury'has shaped the U.S. military's medical and operational strategies since 2009 and perhaps longer. The objective of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the golden hour as a strategic guideline for saving lives in combat operations and to compare it to the use of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and damage control surgical teams located at the forward edge of combat operations. A detailed review of data on the survivability of wounded servicemembers and civilians proved that there is no significant difference in survivability rates when the golden hour is preferred over TCCC. The 60-minute rule has been promoted based on opinion, anecdote, and incomplete data rather than evidence-based practice. This study opposes the continued use of the golden hour rule as an operational metric and instead proposes that U.S. military combat health support doctrine stresses TCCC proficiency and mobile surgical intervention closest to the most likely point of injury.","abstract_html":"The golden hour rule'the belief that trauma patients are more likely to survive if they receive definitive care within 60 minutes of sustaining an injury'has shaped the U.S. military's medical and operational strategies since 2009 and perhaps longer. The objective of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the golden hour as a strategic guideline for saving lives in combat operations and to compare it to the use of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and damage control surgical teams located at the forward edge of combat operations. A detailed review of data on the survivability of wounded servicemembers and civilians proved that there is no significant difference in survivability rates when the golden hour is preferred over TCCC. The 60-minute rule has been promoted based on opinion, anecdote, and incomplete data rather than evidence-based practice. This study opposes the continued use of the golden hour rule as an operational metric and instead proposes that U.S. military combat health support doctrine stresses TCCC proficiency and mobile surgical intervention closest to the most likely point of injury.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Euse, Mark"],"institution":"Monterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"National Security Affairs (NSA)","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Russell, James A."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2020,"date_issued":"2020-09","date_published":"2020-09","updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:24:23Z","subjects":[],"languages":[],"rights":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/10945/66071","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Russell, James A."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["National Security Affairs (NSA)"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Euse, Mark"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["Sep-20"]},{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2020-11-18T00:22:56Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2020-11-18T00:22:56Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2020-09"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Monterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/10945/66071"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The golden hour rule'the belief that trauma patients are more likely to survive if they receive definitive care within 60 minutes of sustaining an injury'has shaped the U.S. military's medical and operational strategies since 2009 and perhaps longer. The objective of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the golden hour as a strategic guideline for saving lives in combat operations and to compare it to the use of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and damage control surgical teams located at the forward edge of combat operations. A detailed review of data on the survivability of wounded servicemembers and civilians proved that there is no significant difference in survivability rates when the golden hour is preferred over TCCC. The 60-minute rule has been promoted based on opinion, anecdote, and incomplete data rather than evidence-based practice. This study opposes the continued use of the golden hour rule as an operational metric and instead proposes that U.S. military combat health support doctrine stresses TCCC proficiency and mobile surgical intervention closest to the most likely point of injury."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["HAS THE SUN SET ON THE GOLDEN HOUR?"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Russell, James A."],"dc:contributor.department":["National Security Affairs (NSA)"],"dc:creator":["Euse, Mark"],"dc:date":["Sep-20"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2020-11-18T00:22:56Z"],"dc:date.available":["2020-11-18T00:22:56Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2020-09"],"dc:description.abstract":["The golden hour rule'the belief that trauma patients are more likely to survive if they receive definitive care within 60 minutes of sustaining an injury'has shaped the U.S. military's medical and operational strategies since 2009 and perhaps longer. The objective of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the golden hour as a strategic guideline for saving lives in combat operations and to compare it to the use of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) and damage control surgical teams located at the forward edge of combat operations. A detailed review of data on the survivability of wounded servicemembers and civilians proved that there is no significant difference in survivability rates when the golden hour is preferred over TCCC. The 60-minute rule has been promoted based on opinion, anecdote, and incomplete data rather than evidence-based practice. This study opposes the continued use of the golden hour rule as an operational metric and instead proposes that U.S. military combat health support doctrine stresses TCCC proficiency and mobile surgical intervention closest to the most likely point of injury."],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/10945/66071"],"dc:publisher":["Monterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School"],"dc:rights":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States"],"dc:title":["HAS THE SUN SET ON THE GOLDEN HOUR?"],"dc:type":["Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:24:23Z"}