Remote Health Care at U.S. Antarctic Stations: A Comparison with Standard Emergency Medical Practice

Abstract

Background: The three U.S. Antarctic research stations' medical facilities exist in an isolated, harsh environment, typical of many such facilities throughout the world. Emergency physicians frequently staff these medical facilities; however, most who are considering this have many misconceptions about the stations and about the scope of medical practice that exists there. Objective: This article illuminates how Antarctic medical practice is comparable with and dissimilar to other emergency medicine experiences and highlights information that any emergency physician-applicant to an isolated medical position should learn prior to accepting the position. Discussion: Antarctic medical care both parallels and differs from typical emergency medical practice in many ways, including the patient population, facilities, supplies, equipment, clinical duties (e.g., providing out-and inpatient medical and dental care, performing laboratory tests and imaging), and nonclinical duties (e.g., disaster planning, teaching, food service inspection, and public health officer). Climate-related limitations on medical evacuation epitomize the stations' isolation. Medical practice may be complicated by ethical issues common in other small isolated settings, such as a lack of privacy and confidentiality. Clinicians considering an isolated practice opportunity should ask basic questions to learn as much detailed information as possible prior to taking the positions. Conclusion: Medical practice at U.S. Antarctic stations, as at many remote health care facilities throughout the world, has similarities to standard emergency medical practice. Even so, significant differences result in a steep learning curve. Any clinicians considering practicing in these locations should carefully evaluate the practice and the environment in advance of any deployment. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.