Abstract
The decision to introduce canines (K9s) to a law enforcement (LE) agency does not typically involve the evaluation of the fiscal or clinical impact on local hospitals. This study compared injury, cost, and care associated with K9s to a common nonlethal force method, the Thomas A Swift Electrical Rifle (TASER), to highlight the cost and resources required to treat both patient types. Patients treated for LE-related K9 and TASER injuries at a Level I community-based trauma center (2011–2016) were evaluated for level of care required (e.g., surgeon/specialist), clinical interventions, proxy medical costs, and length of stay (LOS). Nearly one-third of K9 patients required tertiary-level medical care. The cost of treating the K9-inflicted injuries (n = 75) was almost twice as costly as care for patients subdued with a TASER (n = 80); the K9 patients had significantly (one-tailed t tests) higher medical costs (P = 0.036), required more medical procedures (P = 0.014), and had longer LOS (P = 0.0046) than the TASER patients. Patients with K9 injuries had higher acuity and were significantly more expensive to treat with longer LOS than TASER injuries. LE agencies considering establishing and operating a K9 unit should initiate discussions with their local medical first responders and health-care facilities regarding the capabilities to treat severe K9 injuries to ensure adequate resource allocation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.