Examining military medical evacuation dispatching policies utilizing a Markov decision process model of a controlled queueing system
- 146 Downloads
Military medical planners must develop dispatching policies that dictate how aerial medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) units are utilized during major combat operations. The objective of this research is to determine how to optimally dispatch MEDEVAC units in response to 9-line MEDEVAC requests to maximize MEDEVAC system performance. A discounted, infinite horizon Markov decision process (MDP) model is developed to examine the MEDEVAC dispatching problem. The MDP model allows the dispatching authority to accept, reject, or queue incoming requests based on a request’s classification (i.e., zone and precedence level) and the state of the MEDEVAC system. A representative planning scenario based on contingency operations in southern Afghanistan is utilized to investigate the differences between the optimal dispatching policy and three practitioner-friendly myopic policies. Two computational experiments are conducted to examine the impact of selected MEDEVAC problem features on the optimal policy and the system performance measure. Several excursions are examined to identify how the 9-line MEDEVAC request arrival rate and the MEDEVAC flight speeds impact the optimal dispatching policy. Results indicate that dispatching MEDEVAC units considering the precedence level of requests and the locations of busy MEDEVAC units increases the performance of the MEDEVAC system. These results inform the development and implementation of MEDEVAC tactics, techniques, and procedures by military medical planners. Moreover, an analysis of solution approaches for the MEDEVAC dispatching problem reveals that the policy iteration algorithm substantially outperforms the linear programming algorithms executed by CPLEX 12.6 with regard to computational effort. This result supports the claim that policy iteration remains the superlative solution algorithm for exactly solving computationally tractable Markov decision problems.
KeywordsMarkov decision processes Military medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) Admission control Queueing Emergency medical service (EMS)
The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Army, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or the United States Government. The authors would like to thank the United States Army Medical Evacuation Proponency Directorate for its support of this research.
- Bixby, R. E. (2012). A brief history of linear and mixed-integer programming computation. Documenta Mathematica, Extra Volume: Optimization Stories, 107–121.Google Scholar
- Cox, M. (2016). Bell touts future army helicopter design: ’V-280 is not a V-22’. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/15/bell-touts-future-army-helicopter-design-v280-is-not-a-v22.html. Accessed 7 September 2016.
- De Lorenzo, R. A. (2003). Military casualty evacuation: MEDEVAC (pp. 45–59)., Aeromedical evacuation: Management of acute and stabilized patients New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Department of Defense. (2016). Defense Casualties Analysis System (DCAS) Operation FREEDOM’S SENTINEL (OFS). https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/casualties_ofs.xhtml. Accessed 22 December 2016.
- Department of the Army. (2000). Field manual 8-10-6, medical evacuation in a theater of operations.Google Scholar
- Department of the Army. (2016). Army Techniques Publication 4-02.2, medical evacuation. Change 1.Google Scholar
- Fish, P. N. (2014). Army medical officer’s guide. Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books.Google Scholar
- Fulton, L. V., Lasdon, L. S., McDaniel, R. R., & Coppola, M. N. (2010). Two-stage stochastic optimization for the allocation of medical assets in steady-state combat operations. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, 7(2), 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Garrett, M. X. (2013). USCENTCOM review of MEDEVAC procedures in Afghanistan. Technical report, United States Central Command.Google Scholar
- Gross, D., & Harris, C. M. (1998). Fundamentals of queueing theory (4th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Hoffman, M. (2015). Army wants more adaptive HH-60 medical evacuation systems. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/03/army-wants-more-adaptive-hh60-medical-evacuation-systems.html. Accessed 7 September 2016.
- International Council on Security and Development (ICOS). (2008). Afghanistan–Pakistan Insurgent activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan (2007). http://www.icosgroup.net/wp-content/gallery/taliban-presence/016_map.png. Accessed 4 January 2017.
- Kulkarni, V. G. (2009). Modeling and analysis of stochastic systems (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
- Lejeune, M. A., & Margot, F. (2016). Aeromedical battlefield evacuation under endogenous uncertainty. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg, PA.Google Scholar
- Nicholl, J., Coleman, P., Parry, G., Turner, J., & Dixon, S. (1999). Emergency priority dispatch systemsa new era in the provision of ambulance services in the UK. Pre-Hospital Immediate Care, 3(2), 71–75.Google Scholar
- O’Shea, B. (2011). Saving lives on the battlefield. Military Medical/CBRN Technology, 15(6), 8–13.Google Scholar
- Sundstrom, S. C., Blood, C. G., & Matheny, S. A. (1996). The optimal placement of casualty evacuation assets: A linear programming model. In Proceedings of the 28th conference on winter simulation (pp. 907–911). IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
- White, M. (2016). Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF), Fatalities by Provinces. http://icasualties.org/OEF/ByProvince.aspx. Accessed 22 December 2016.
- Zeto, J., Yamada, W., & Collins, G. (2006). Optimizing the emplacement of scarce resources to maximize the expected coverage of a geographically variant demand function. In Proceedings of technical report, US Center for Army Analysis, Ft Belvoir.Google Scholar