Page 39 - JSOM Winter 2023

FIGURE 4 Times from “Occlusion” to “Done.”
st
(A) "1 occlusion" to "Done" (seconds) (B) "Last occlusion" to "Done"
if >1 occlusion (seconds)
5
2
3
4
80
0
1
20
40
60
5
CAT7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
SOFTTW3
SOFTTW5
No struggle securing TMT CAT7
SOFTTW3
OMT
X8T No struggle securing SOFTTW5
TMT
Tac RMT OMT
RST X8T
Tac RMT
RST
Struggle securing
Struggle securing
Good security
Good security
Bad security
Bad security
Tight strap
No struggle securing Tight strap
No struggle securing
Loose strap
No struggle securing Loose strap
No struggle securing
Tight strap
Struggle securing Tight strap
Struggle securing
Loose strap
Struggle securing Loose strap
Struggle securing
A video orientation for the graphs can be accessed at https://vimeo.com/ • TMT p=.0002 No struggle securing (n=36) versus Struggle securing
799944365. The x-axis has application processes and process quality for (n=17)
processes that occur between occlusion and a completed application with • RST p=.069 Tight strap No struggle securing (n=23) versus Loose strap
hands off the tourniquet. Symbols for applications with the good version No struggle securing (n=34).
of the indicated processes have open circles. Symbols for applications with (B) Time differences from “last occlusion” to “Done” versus “first occlu-
a bad version have downward-pointing open triangles. The colors on the sion” to “Done” if the “last occlusion” was not the same as the “first oc-
graphs are linked with the tourniquets as follows: CAT7 = gray, SOFTTW3 clusion”. P-values for time comparisons from “last occlusion” to “Done”
= red, SOFTTW5 = orange, TMT = magenta, OMT = dark blue, X8T = between all the tourniquets are as follows:
dark green, Tac RMT = light green, RST = lavender. Times are for applica- • No struggle securing (the tightening system); n=386; p<.030 CAT7
tions with good orientation when the strap was secured (good orientation versus SOFTTW3, SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0001
defined as the video-shown orientation 2-10 with the redirect buckle lateral SOFTTW3 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.003 SOFTTW5
and the tightening system located above the redirect).
versus TMT, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0001 TMT versus
(A) Times from “first occlusion” to “Done.” P-values for time comparisons OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; each p<.0003 for each windlass rod
between each of the tourniquets are as follows: tourniquet versus each self-securing tightening system tourniquet
• No struggle securing (the tightening system), n=386, p<.030 CAT7 • Good security (tightening system according to study instructions);
versus all except TMT; p<.030 SOFTTW3 versus all except SOFTTW5; n=383; p<.002 CAT7 versus SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and
p<.003 SOFTTW5 versus all except SOFTTW3; p<.005 TMT versus RST; p<.0004 SOFTTW3 versus SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT,
all except CAT7; each p<.0001 for each windlass rod tourniquet versus and RST; p<.007 SOFTTW5 versus TMT, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and
each self-securing tightening system tourniquet RST; p<.007 TMT versus SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST;
• Good security (tightening system according to study instructions); p<.0005 for each windlass rod tourniquet versus each self-securing
n=383; p<.003 CAT7 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.020 tightening system tourniquet
SOFTTW3 versus SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.003 • Tight strap No struggle securing; n=215; p<.0001 CAT7 versus
SOFTTW5 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0001 TMT versus SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p=.083 CAT7 versus
OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST SOFTTW3; p<.003 SOFTTW3 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST;
• Tight strap No struggle securing; n=215; p<.004 CAT7 versus p<.030 SOFTTW5 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0002 TMT
SOFTTW5, OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.050 SOFTTW3 versus versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; each p<.030 for each windlass rod
OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.040 SOFTTW5 versus OMT, X8T, tourniquet versus each self-securing tightening system tourniquet
Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0001 TMT versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and • Loose strap No struggle securing; n=173; p<.030 SOFTTW3 versus
RST; p=.079 TMT versus SOFTTW5; each p<.050 for each windlass rod OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.0005 SOFTTW5 versus X8T, Tac
tourniquet versus each self-securing tightening system tourniquet RMT, and RST; p=.124 SOFTTW5 versus OMT; p<.0002 TMT versus
• Loose strap No struggle securing; n=173; p<.0003 SOFTTW3 versus OMT, X8T, Tac RMT, and RST.
X8T, Tac RMT, and RST; p<.003 SOFTTW5 versus X8T, Tac RMT, and P-values for time comparisons within a specific tourniquet are as follows:
RST; p=.040 TMT versus SOFTTW3; p<.0001 TMT versus OMT, X8T, • CAT7 p=.003 Good security (n=17) versus Bad security (n=36)
Tac RMT, and RST. • SOFTTW3 p<.050 No struggle securing (n=36) versus Struggle securing
P-values for time comparisons within a specific tourniquet are as follows: (n=20), Tight strap Struggle securing (n=6) versus Loose strap Struggle
• CAT7 p=.008 Good security (n=17) versus Bad security (n=36) securing (n=14)
• SOFTTW3 p<.040 No struggle securing (n=36) versus Struggle securing • SOFTTW5 p<.0001 No struggle securing (n=47) versus Struggle securing
(n=20), Tight strap Struggle securing (n=6) versus Loose strap Struggle (n=10)
securing (n=14) • TMT p=.002 No struggle securing (n=36) versus Struggle securing (n=17)
• SOFTTW5 p<.0001 No struggle securing (n=47) versus Struggle securing • RST p=.069 Tight strap No struggle securing (n=23) versus Loose strap
(n=10) No struggle securing (n=34).

Tourniquet Processes Times | 37