Los sistemas de autoprotección tienen ventajas en el proceso. Debido a que la mayoría de los receptores de torniquetes emergentes requieren transporte, creemos que la seguridad de los torniquetes es un aspecto crítico del diseño. Las decisiones sobre la elección del torniquete pueden llegar a ser muy diferentes cuando se consideran tanto la oclusión como la seguridad del torniquete.
Los procesos subóptimos aumentan los tiempos de aplicación. Las características de diseño óptimas para aplicaciones de torniquetes rápidas, oclusivas y seguras son sistemas de correa/redireccionamiento autoasegurantes con un clip fácilmente identificado y utilizado y sistemas de apriete autoasegurantes.
Effects of Tourniquet Features on Application Processes
Wall P, Buising CM, Jensen J, White A, Davis J, Renner CH. 23(4). 11 - 30. (Journal Article)
Abstract
Background: We investigated emergency-use limb tourniquet design features effects on application processes (this paper) and times to complete those processes (companion paper). Methods: Sixty-four appliers watched training videos and then each applied all eight tourniquets: Combat Application Tourniquet Generation 7 (CAT7), SOF™ Tactical Tourniquet-Wide Generation 3 (SOFTTW3), SOF™ Tactical Tourniquet-Wide Generation 5 (SOFTTW5), Tactical Mechanical Tourniquet (TMT), OMNA Marine Tourniquet (OMT), X8T tourniquet (X8T), Tactical Ratcheting Medical Tourniquet (Tac RMT), and RapidStop™ Tourniquet (RST). Application processes were scored from videos. Results: Thirty-three appliers had no prior tourniquet experience. All 512 applications were placed proximal to the recipient's simulated distal thigh injury. Thirty-one appliers (13 with no experience) had 66 problem-free applications (18 by no experience appliers). Tightening-system mechanical problems were more frequent with windlass rod systems (26 losing hold of the rod, 27 redoing rod turns, and 58 struggling to secure the rod) versus ratchet systems (3 tooth skips and 16 advance failures). Thirty-five appliers (21 with no experience) had 68 applications (45 by no experience appliers) with an audible Doppler pulse when stating "Done"; causes involved premature stopping (53), inadequate strap pull (1 SOFTTW3, 1 RST), strap/redirect understanding problem (1 SOFTTW5, 1 X8T, 4 Tac RMT, 1 RST), tightening-system understanding problem (2 CAT7, 1 SOFTTW3, 1 TMT, 1 RST), and physical inability to secure (1 SOFTTW3). Fifty-three appliers (32 no experience) had 109 applications (64 by no experience appliers) not correctly secured. Six involved strap/redirect understanding problems: 4 Tac RMT, 1 X8T, 1 SOFTTW5; 103 involved improper securing of non-self-securing design features: 47 CAT7 (8 strap, 45 rod), 31 TMT (17 strap, 19 rod), 22 OMT (strap), and 3 SOFTTW3 (rod). Conclusion: Self-securing systems have process advantages. Because most emergent tourniquet recipients require transport, we believe tourniquet security is a critical design aspect. Decisions regarding tourniquet choices may become very different when both occlusion and tourniquet security are considered.
Keywords: tourniquet; hemorrhage; first aid; emergency treatment
PMID: 38085636
DOI: 8FFG-1Q48
Effects of Tourniquet Features on Application Processes Times
Wall P, Buising CM, White A, Jensen J, Davis J, Renner CH. 23(4). 31 - 42. (Journal Article)
Abstract
Background: We investigated emergency-use limb tourniquet design features effects on application processes (companion paper) and times to complete those processes (this paper). Methods: Sixty-four appliers watched training videos then each applied all eight tourniquets: Combat Application Tour- niquet Generation 7 (CAT7), SOF™ Tactical Tourniquet-Wide Generation 3 (SOFTTW3), SOF™ Tactical Tourniquet-Wide Generation 5 (SOFTTW5), Tactical Mechanical Tourniquet (TMT), OMNA Marine Tourniquet (OMT), X8T-Tourniquet (X8T), Tactical Ratcheting Medical Tourniquet (Tac RMT), and RapidStop Tourniquet (RST). Application processes times were captured from videos. Results: From "Go" to "touch tightening system" was fastest with clips and self-securing redirect buckles and without strap/redirect application process problems (n, median seconds: CAT7 n=23, 26.89; SOFTTW3 n=11, 20.95; SOFTTW5 n=16, 20.53; TMT n=5, 26.61; OMT n=12, 25.94; X8T n=3, 18.44; Tac RMT n=15, 30.59; RST n=7, 22.80). From "touch tightening system" to "last occlusion" was fastest with windlass rod systems when there were no tightening system understanding or mechanical problems (seconds: CAT7 n=48, 4.21; SOFTTW3 n=47, 5.99; SOFTTW5 n=44, 4.65; TMT n=38, 6.21; OMT n=51, 6.22; X8T n=48, 7.59; Tac RMT n=52, 8.44; RST n=40, 8.02). For occluded, tightening system secure applications, from "touch tightening system" to "Done" was fastest with self-securing tightening systems tightening from a tight strap (occluded, secure time in seconds from a tight strap: CAT7 n=17, 14.47; SOFTTW3 n=22, 10.91; SOFTTW5 n=38, 9.19; TMT n=14, 11.42; OMT n=44, 7.01; X8T n=12 9.82; Tac RMT n=20, 6.45; RST n=23, 8.64). Conclusions: Suboptimal processes in- crease application times. Optimal design features for fast, occlusive, secure tourniquet applications are self-securing strap/ redirect systems with an easily identified and easily used clip and self-securing tightening systems.
Keywords: tourniquet; hemorrhage; first aid; emergency treatment
PMID: 38112184
DOI: RPO1-CB79
No comments:
Post a Comment