What is the difference between evacuation in a contiguous versus non-contiguous AO?

• A. A non-contiguous AO may routinely bypass roles of care due to necessity from geographic locations of MTFs
• B. A contiguous AO requires specialized medical units
• C. There is no difference
• D. Evacuation is slower in non-contiguous AO

Answer: (A)

In evacuation planning, geography of the area of operation drives how patients are moved and through which levels of care they pass. A non-contiguous AO is spread out with gaps (often including bodies of water or long distances between facilities), so the usual, linear flow through every echelon of care isn’t practical. Because MTFs are not all reachable in a straightforward path, planners may need to route patients directly to the most capable facility available, bypassing some intermediate levels of care to minimize delay and get definitive treatment sooner. That’s why a non-contiguous AO may routinely bypass certain care roles due to the geographic locations of medical facilities.

The other statements don’t fit the real-world planning emphasis. It isn’t about requiring specialized units only in contiguous AOs, and there isn’t a blanket rule that evacuation is always slower in non-contiguous AOs—the speed depends on available airlift, sea assets, and prepositioned facilities, so bypassing intermediate care can actually save time when needed.