Enhancing Combat Support to Multidomain Operations
A Critical Appraisal and Proposal for Standardizing Point-of-Care Ultrasound Training for the US Army
By CPT Ryan A. Stevens MD, MBA, RDMS, CPT Theodore McLean MD, LTC Aicha Hull, MD, LTC Melissa Myers,
MD, MAJ Renato Rapada, DO, MAJ Kristine Jeffers, MD and MAJ Chelsea Ausman MD, RDMS
Article published on: April 1, 2026 in the 2026 E-Edition of Pulse of Army Medicine
Read Time: < 8 mins
Abstract
The U.S. Army has a critical capability gap due to a lack of standardized training for its medical officers
and enlisted personnel in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). Although POCUS is a vital diagnostic tool in
forward-deployed environments, current training is fragmented and limited to academic and specialized
fellowship pathways. To address this gap, we propose a solution-oriented approach, advocating for the
development of a dedicated training doctrine or the integration of POCUS into existing military medical
curricula to better prepare clinicians to support the fighting force.
Healthcare professionals are increasingly utilizing point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), a dynamic tool that
provides real-time imaging for diagnostic and procedural applications, which are vital for medical support in
forward-deployed operations. This aligns with the Army Health System doctrine, which emphasizes the necessity of
an agile force capable of adapting to a rapidly evolving multidomain operational landscape. However, a
significant capability gap persists: the absence of standardized POCUS training for both Army medical officers
and enlisted personnel. There is a need to explore the potential of POCUS to enhance medical support for
military operations.
A Fragmented Landscape: Current POCUS Training in the U.S. Army
POCUS training for clinicians within the U.S. Army is unevenly distributed and lacks standardized expectations
and curricula, creating an opportunity to strengthen and enhance ultrasound training. Army Medicine must
establish standards for the knowledge and skills required for POCUS to be ready for both current and future
conflicts. Most formal POCUS instruction occurs in academic settings such as the Uniformed Services University
(USU) or within select Graduate Medical Education (GME) residency programs, primarily Emergency Medicine and
Family Medicine.
Beyond these pathways, a limited number of physicians and Physician Assistants complete Advanced Emergency
Medicine Ultrasound (AEMUS) fellowships each year. The limited number of personnel trained in POCUS within the
military has led to a widespread misunderstanding. Many trust that medical officers, regardless of specialized
training, are fully equipped to handle the complete range of POCUS applications. This misconception is largely
due to a general lack of understanding. The AEMUS fellowships, while valuable, are highly specialized programs
that produce POCUS subject matter experts and administrative leaders capable of managing and teaching at GME
programs beyond the scope of the general military clinician. From a military operational perspective, these
fellowship-trained clinicians must lead the POCUS training programs that we have yet to officially establish.
The Urgent Need to Bridge the POCUS Training Gap
Rapid, accurate, and lightweight diagnostics are essential for forward-deployed personnel. POCUS provides that
capability, making it a critical asset for mission success and directly impacting Soldier survivability (Curley,
2025). In austere environments where traditional imaging modalities like CT or MRI cannot be used due to size
and weight constraints, POCUS provides a distinct advantage because it is far more deployable.
The use of ultrasound in Iraq and Afghanistan directly enhanced trauma care, and its role is expected to expand
in future conflicts. In forward-deployed settings, POCUS is crucial for evaluating life-threatening conditions,
including intra-abdominal hemorrhage, cardiac emergencies, and thoracic trauma. It is also indispensable for
guiding decisions about resource allocation and evacuation priorities. For example, POCUS is a highly effective
first-line tool for detecting pneumothorax, outperforming traditional chest radiography with a sensitivity of
86-91 percent compared with only 23-47 percent. This capability enhances casualty triage and helps conserve
evacuation assets in contested environments. As noted, POCUS is paramount for rapid, efficient resource
allocation in triage scenarios, allowing medical providers to quickly categorize patients by injury severity and
optimize the use of limited medical and evacuation resources. Its portability and diagnostic accuracy make POCUS
the preferred imaging tool for triage and evaluation in the field.
Additionally, POCUS allows medical providers to rule in or rule out pathology at the point of care, serving as a
force conservation tool by preventing unnecessary medical evacuations and preserving scarce airframes for
critically wounded personnel. It also enhances the safety and precision of life-saving procedures by enabling
clinicians to perform with greater accuracy and confidence. For example, POCUS reduces time to successful
vascular access, particularly for novice users. It also confirms endotracheal tube placement and guides nerve
blocks, ultimately improving patient safety and reducing complications.
The operational argument for POCUS is reinforced by the Army’s emerging Ultrasound Field Portable (USFP) program.
This program of record is a strategic initiative to field handheld diagnostic imaging capabilities to Role 1 and
Role 2 units, formally bridging the gap between austere medicine and hospital-based diagnostics. Scheduled for
fielding to Role 1 and Role 2 units beginning in Fiscal Year 2026, the USFP will use a portable solution
weighing less than one pound. This information is timely and relevant to historical concerns regarding weight
and logistical burden for the dismounted forward-deployed clinician. Furthermore, the planned integration of
this device into the Medical Equipment Set (MES) acknowledges that in a PCC scenario involving evacuation
delays, diagnostic blindness is a critical vulnerability.
Standardization of Training: A Solution-Based Proposal
To effectively address this critical gap, the Army must establish dedicated, standardized POCUS training for
medical officers that clarifies expectations across the force. This solution aligns with Joint Publication
covering health service support and the Army regulation for training and leader development, both of which
emphasize the importance of standardized training and the integration of medical capabilities (Department of the
Army, 2025; The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2012). Below are four proposed courses of action (COAs).
Across all recommended COAs, the course content covered should include seven core POCUS applications relevant to
military medicine: Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (EFAST), ocular, cardiac, lung,
vascular, musculoskeletal ultrasound, and procedural guidance (ACEP Ultrasound Section, 2016; Military Health
System, 2025b, 2025a, 2025c). The curriculum must emphasize military-specific scenarios, such as battlefield
trauma, mass casualty triage, and the use and logistics of POCUS in far-forward facilities.
Recommended Potential Courses of Action
COA 1: Develop an in-person POCUS training program for military clinicians.
A 40 to 80-hour course could provide the necessary standardized didactics and hands-on experience, focusing on
core military-relevant applications. The advantage of this approach is its immediate operational impact;
deploying clinicians would acquire directly applicable skills for battlefield trauma and mass casualty care.
While highly effective, this model is resource-intensive, requiring a significant investment in dedicated
instructors, equipment, and continuous course offerings to sustain the capability across the force.
COA 2: Integrate POCUS training directly into the military’s medical education pipeline.
By embedding instruction into medical school curricula, residency programs, and advanced practice provider
education, this systematic approach would ensure every new clinician graduates with a standardized foundation in
POCUS. The main advantage is that it creates a long-term pipeline of POCUS-trained clinicians across the entire
force. However, this model would require a significant amount of time to design, disseminate the curriculum, and
train faculty to a standard across military and civilian partner institutions. Additionally, this training
pathway primarily targets individuals currently assigned to an educational setting, rather than all actively
practicing clinicians, who would also benefit from POCUS training.
COA 3: Establish a doctrinal solution by creating an Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Training Circular
(TC) for military medical clinicians training in POCUS.
This document would formalize standardized training expectations, define competency-based goals, and outline a
transparent certification process that includes both theoretical and practical components. This approach is
highly scalable and enduring. Once doctrine is published, it becomes the official standard for POCUS training
and proficiency across the entire force, regardless of a clinician’s unit or location. This option would likely
require extended time for implementation, given the need for extensive coordination and consensus among various
stakeholders.
COA 4: Integrate POCUS training into the existing Tactical Combat Medical Care (TCMC) course.
TCMC is a five-day training program for medical professionals, including doctors, physician assistants, nurses,
and medics. As the standard for wartime care, Tactical Combat Medical Care (TCMC) is also a readiness metric for
many clinicians. Currently, the Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (EFAST) is taught in this
course. By officially adding additional POCUS components to this well-established course, the Army could rapidly
fill a critical training gap by leveraging its existing infrastructure. Critically, as the USFP device is slated
for inclusion in the Medical Equipment Set (MES), aligning the course curriculum with the incoming material
solution is essential to prevent a capability mismatch where equipment is fielded to untrained providers. While
this approach offers the clear advantages of speed and feasibility, it is limited by the course length, as
additional content may require rebalancing the current curriculum or expanding the course’s duration.
Standardize POCUS Training
Army clinicians lack standardized POCUS training, creating a critical capability gap that directly threatens
readiness in future conflicts. It is a crucial tool for rapid diagnostics, time-sensitive interventions, and
efficient triage, factors that directly impact medical logistics, Soldier survivability, and overall force
lethality. By establishing a unified AMEDD training standard, Army Medicine can collectively advance toward the
next generation of combat medical diagnostic capabilities, aligning our Army Health System with the broader
vision of an agile, ready force capable of winning in multidomain operations. By acting now to synchronize
standardized training with the incoming Ultrasound Portable Program (USFP) materiel solution, Army Medicine can
ensure that every clinician is equipped with the POCUS skills of winning in multidomain operations. By acting
now to synchronize standardized training with the incoming Ultrasound Portable Program (USFP) materiel solution,
Army Medicine can ensure that every clinician is equipped with the POCUS skills necessary to save lives,
conserve the fighting strength, and enable mission success in the most austere and contested environments.
References
ACEP. (2009). Emergency ultrasound guidelines. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 53(4), 550–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.12.013
ACEP Ultrasound Section. (2016). Military and Tactical Ultrasound. https://www.acep.org/emultrasound/subcommittees/prehospital-austere-tactical-ultrasound
Adhikari, S., Leo, M., Liu, R., Johnston, M., Keehbauch, J., Barton, M., & Kendall, J. (2023). The 2023 Core
Content of advanced emergency medicine ultrasonography. JACEP Open, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/emp2.13015
Alrajhi, K., Woo, M. Y., & Vaillancourt, C. (2012). Test characteristics of ultrasonography for the detection
of pneumothorax: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest, 141(3), 703–708. https://doi.org/10.1378/CHEST.11-0131
Anderson, A., & Theophanous, R. G. (2024). Point-of-care ultrasound use in austere environments: A scoping
review. PLoS ONE, 19(12 December). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312017
Brown, J. R., Goldsmith, A. J., Lapietra, A., Zeballos, J. L., Vlassakov, K. V., Stone, A. B., Knight, R. S.,
Carnell, J., & Nagdev, A. (2022). Ultrasound-Guided Nerve Blocks: Suggested Procedural Guidelines for
Emergency Physicians. POCUS Journal, 7(2), 253–261. https://doi.org/10.24908/pocus.v7i2.15233
Chan, K. K., Joo, D. A., McRae, A. D., Takwoingi, Y., Premji, Z. A., Lang, E., & Wakai, A. (2020). Chest
ultrasonography versus supine chest radiography for diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients in the
emergency department. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2020(7). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013031.PUB2
Curley, J. (2025). Ultrasound Use by Special Operations Combat Medics: A Narrative Review Limited to the
JSOM. Journal of Special Operations Medicine : A Peer Reviewed Journal for SOF Medical
Professionals. https://doi.org/10.55460/BVIQ-WJ8K
DeLoach, J. P., Reif, R. J., Smedley, W. A., Klutts, G. N., Bhavaraju, A., Collins, T. H., & Kalkwarf, K. J.
(2023). Are Chest Radiographs or Ultrasound More Accurate in Predicting a Pneumothorax or Need for a
Thoracostomy Tube in Trauma Patients? The American SurgeonTM, 89(9), 3751–3756. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348231175105
DeMasi, S., Parker, M. S., Joyce, M., Mulligan, K., Feeser, S., & Balderston, J. R. (2023). Thoracic
point-of-care ultrasound is an accurate diagnostic modality for clinically significant traumatic
pneumothorax. Academic Emergency Medicine, 30(6), 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14663
Department of the Army. (2022). FM 3-0 Operations. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN43326-FM_3-0-000-WEB-1.pdf
Department of the Army. (2025). AR 350-1 Army Training and Leader Development. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN44161-AR_350-1-001-WEB-2.pdf
Department of Defense. (2024). Notice of Intent to Sole Source: Development of the Philips Lumify
ultrasound system. https://sam.gov/opp/5e09c518e0b24947a845d98d51603b7a/view
Dubecq, C., Dubourg, O., Morand, G., Montagnon, R., Travers, S., & Mahe, P. (2021). Point-of-care ultrasound
for treatment and triage in austere military environments. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care
Surgery, 91(2), S124–S129. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000003308
Gottlieb, M., Holladay, D., & Peksa, G. D. (2018). Ultrasonography for the Confirmation of Endotracheal Tube
Intubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 72(6), 627–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.06.024
Hellenthal, K. E. M., Porschen, C., Wnent, J., & Lange, M. (2025). Evolving role of point-of-care ultrasound
in prehospital emergency care: A narrative review. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and
Emergency Medicine, 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-025-01443-x
Military Health System. (2025a, September 29). BAMC Advanced Emergency Medicine Ultrasound. https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Education-and-Training/DHA-GME/Institutions/SAUSHEC/Programs/aemus
Military Health System. (2025b, September 29). Darnall AMC Advanced Emergency Medicine Ultrasound.
https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Education-and-Training/DHA-GME/Institutions/Darnall/Programs/aemus
Military Health System. (2025c, September 29). Madigan AMC Advanced Emergency Medicine Ultrasound.
https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Education-and-Training/DHA-GME/Institutions/Madigan/Programs/aemus
Moore, C. L., & Copel, J. A. (2011). Point-of-Care Ultrasonography. New England Journal of Medicine,
364(8), 749–757. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra0909487
Myers, M. A., Chin, E. J., Billstrom, A. R., Cohen, J. L., Van Arnem, K. A., & Schauer, S. G. (2021).
Ultrasound at the Role 1: An Analysis of After-Action Reviews from the Prehospital Trauma Registry.
Medical Journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.), PB 8-21-07/08/09, 20–24. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34449856
Russell, T. C., & Crawford, P. F. (2013). Ultrasound in the Austere Environment: A Review of the History,
Indications, and Specifications. Military Medicine, 178(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-12-00267
Shokoohi, H., Pourmand, A., Boniface, K., Allen, R., Petinaux, B., Sarani, B., & Phillips, J. P. (2018). The
utility of point-of-care ultrasound in targeted automobile ramming mass casualty (TARMAC) attacks. The
American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 36(8), 1467–1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2018.05.058
Smith, I. M., Naumann, D. N., Marsden, M. E. R., Ballard, M., & Bowley, D. M. (2015). Scanning and War:
Utility of FAST and CT in the Assessment of Battlefield Abdominal Trauma. Annals of Surgery,
262(2), 389–396. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001002
Stengel, D., Leisterer, J., Ferrada, P., Ekkernkamp, A., Mutze, S., & Hoenning, A. (2018). Point-of-care
ultrasonography for diagnosing thoracoabdominal injuries in patients with blunt trauma. Cochrane
Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(12). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012669.PUB2
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2012). JP 4-02 Health Service Support. https://www.jcs.mil/Doctrine/Joint-Doctrine-Pubs/
U.S. Army Medical Center of Excellence. (2024). MEDCoE PAM 4-02 AHS Doctrine Smart Book. https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-609342
Wiskar, K. (2025). The Expanding Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Paradigm. POCUS Journal, 10(01),
9–10. https://doi.org/10.24908/pocusj.v10i01.18408