Page 66 - Journal of Special Operations Medicine - Fall 2014
P. 66

Testing of Junctional Tourniquets by
                 Military Medics to Control Simulated Groin Hemorrhage



                       John F. Kragh Jr., MD; Donald L. Parsons, PA-C; Russ S. Kotwal, MD;
                    Bijan S. Kheirabadi, PhD; James K. Aden III, PhD; Robert T. Gerhardt, MD;
                                    David G. Baer, PhD; Michael A. Dubick, PhD






          ABSTRACT
          Background: Junctional hemorrhage is a common cause   from junctional wounds—those at the junction of the
          of death on the battlefield, but there is no documented   trunk and its appendages.  Not only has the rate of
                                                                                    1,2
          direct comparison for the use of junctional tourniquet   junctional hemorrhage risen, but also junctional hemor-
          models by US medics. The purpose of this testing is to as-  rhage itself is often lethal even with adjuncts that in-
          sess military medic experience with the use of junctional   clude the use of QuikClot  Combat Gauze  (http://www
                                                                                                 ™
                                                                                   ®
          tourniquets in simulated out-of-hospital trauma care.   .z-medica.com/healthcare/Products).  Junctional bleed-
                                                                                            3–5
          Methods: Nine medics (seven men and two women) used   ing is a common preventable cause of death on the bat-
          four different junctional tourniquets: Combat Ready   tlefield.  In a survey of US military war casualty data,
                                                                   4,6
          Clamp  (CRoC ; http://www.combatmedicalsystems     junctional wounds amenable to junctional tourniquets
                         ™
                ™
          .com),  Abdominal Aortic  and Junctional Tourniquet    increased 14-fold over a decade among 833 casualties;
                                                         ™
          (AAJT ; http://www.compressionworks.net), Junctional    145 of the 833 died of wounds, but none had a junc-
                ™
          Emergency Treatment Tool (JETT ; http://www.narescue   tional tourniquet placed. 5
                                      ™
          .com), and SAM Junctional Tourniquet  (SJT ; http://
                                                  ®
                                             ®
          www.sammedical.com/products). These medics also acted    Tai and Dickson of Great Britain’s military medical ser-
          as  simulated  casualties.  Effectiveness  percentages,  as   vices introduced the term “junctional zone trauma” in
          measured by stopped distal pulse by Doppler auscul-  2009 when describing a gap in the care of challenging
          tation, and time to effectiveness were recorded in two   wounds.  Efforts to address this capability gap in hem-
                                                                    7
          tests per tourniquet (72 total tests). Tourniquet users    orrhage control on the battlefield have led to the de-
          ranked their preference of model by answering the ques-  velopment of junctional tourniquets, four of which are
          tion: “If you had to go to war today and you could only   currently approved for use in the United States by the US
          choose one,  which tourniquet would you choose to   Food and Drug Administration.  Feasible procedures
                                                                                         5,8
          bring?” Results: All tourniquets used were safe under   for removing such deficiencies have been outlined. 9–15
          the conditions of this study. Both the SJT and the CRoC   However, evidence did not exist that would distinguish
          had high effectiveness percentages; their rate difference   the tourniquets. To provide such evidence, the current
          was not statistically significant. The SJT and the CRoC   study used medics in a simulated out-of–hospital situa-
          had fast times to effectiveness; their time difference was   tion to compare multiple junctional tourniquets.
          not statistically significant. Users preferred the SJT and
          the CRoC; their ranked difference was not statistically
          significant.  Conclusion: The SJT and the CRoC were   Methods
          equally effective and fast and were preferred by the   A US Army Institute of Surgical Research (USAISR) pro-
          participants.                                      tocol was approved by the dean of the US Army Medical
                                                             Department Center & School under the guidance of the
          Keywords:  tourniquets,  hemorrhage, resuscitation,  groin,   US Army Human Research Protection Office (Customer
          inguinal, medical device, injuries and wounds      Assessment by US Military Medics for User Preference
                                                             Testing of Junctional Tourniquets in Simulated Out-of-
                                                             Hospital Care). This test plan deliberately involved oper-
                                                             ators who were similar to the end-users: North Atlantic
          Introduction
                                                             Treaty Organization (NATO) medics. The two test as-
          Since publication of the book Black Hawk Down, which   sessors were an experienced clinician-scientist with ex-
          describes the US military experience in Mogadishu, So-  pertise in tourniquets and a master instructor for the US
          malia, in 1993, the US military has become increasingly   Army combat medics. All testers (medics) were from the
          aware of the clinical problem of controlling hemorrhage   Army  and  were  mid-grade  enlisted   noncommissioned



                                                          58
   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71