Exploring Combat Tourniquet Application Errors and Duration Among Skilled and Novice Medical Trainees.

Abstract

The use of tourniquets in combat medicine continues to be a key focus as they have consistently been shown to combat one of the leading causes of preventable death on the battlefield, massive hemorrhage to extremities. The present study analyzed tourniquet application among combat medics (68W) and combat lifesavers (CLSs) in a training environment to determine whether trainees' performance is consistent among one another and whether performance can be associated with participant demographics such as experience or role. Study participants treated male and female patient simulators within a tactical field care phase, both of which experienced an amputated leg and required the application of a Combat Application Tourniquet (CAT). To assess tourniquet application variability and performance, a series of application subtasks and potential errors were measured via video coding of the scenarios by a team of 5 coders. Time to tourniquet application and tourniquet application duration were also coded to assess correlations between application duration and variability or performance. Results from analyzing tourniquet application subtasks and errors through a series of one-way ANOVA tests showed that application of the CAT first, hasty CAT application, and high tourniquet application were not predictive of participant role, time within the role, and self-reported tourniquet skill, confidence, or experience. Such demographic variables were also not predictive of successful tourniquet application as defined by the number of windlass rod rotations. Results from binomial logistic regressions showed that participant role and self-reported tourniquet skill and experience were predictors of tourniquet application duration. The findings suggest that high variability in CAT application methodology and performance exists among CLS and combat medics, which is largely not predictable by various demographics such as role, experience within the designated role, and self-reported confidence, skill, or experience. The observed disconnect between training or experience and CAT application performance suggests substantial variability in the consistency of training for both CLS and 68W soldiers. These inconsistencies may stem from variability in instructor knowledge, teaching styles, or training materials or may be developed through informal methods such as experiences in the field or recommendations from colleagues and experts. These findings highlight a potential need to reassess CAT application training, particularly in regard to consistency and validation. Finally, it should be noted that the study's findings may be limited or fail to capture some study effects because of the sample size and wide range of reported experience among participants.