Summary

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed an Army Medical Research and Development Command contract with a university for brain-wound research.

GAO found that: (1) its panel of medical experts and veterinary anesthesiologists concluded that the research goals were valid, and that such research was important in improving the outcome of combat-incurred brain injury; (2) veterinary anesthesiologists questioned the management of the general anesthesia, the management of post-operative care, and the research report's exclusion of data on large numbers of research animals; (3) several anesthesiologists questioned the reliability of blood-gas measurements and the number of animals used that did not result in usable data; (4) the research did not violate a public law limiting the use of cats and dogs in Department of Defense (DOD) research projects; and (5) the Army inadequately managed the research contracts, did not follow its operating procedures for monitoring the performance of the research, and did not provide appropriate technical assistance.