Control of massive hemorrhage (MH) is a life-saving intervention. The use of tourniquets has been studied in prehospital and battlefield settings but not in aquatic environments.

The aim of this research is to assess the control of MH in an aquatic environment by analyzing the usability of two tourniquet models with different adjustment mechanisms: windlass rod versus ratchet.

A pilot simulation study was conducted using a randomized crossover design to assess the control of MH resulting from an upper extremity arterial perforation in an aquatic setting. A sample of 24 trained lifeguards performed two randomized tests: one using a windlass-based Combat Application Tourniquet 7 Gen (T-CAT) and the other using a ratchet-based OMNA Marine Tourniquet (T-OMNA) specifically designed for aquatic use on a training arm for hemorrhage control. The tests were conducted after swimming an approximate distance of 100 meters and the tourniquets were applied while in the water. The following parameters were recorded: time of rescue (rescue phases and tourniquet application), perceived fatigue, and technical actions related to tourniquet skills.

With the T-OMNA, 46% of the lifeguards successfully stopped the MH compared to 21% with the T-CAT (P = .015). The approach swim time was 135 seconds with the T-OMNA and 131 seconds with the T-CAT (P = .42). The total time (swim time plus tourniquet placement) was 174 seconds with the T-OMNA and 177 seconds with the T-CAT (P = .55). The adjustment time (from securing the Velcro to completing the manipulation of the windlass or ratchet) for the T-OMNA was faster than with the T-CAT (six seconds versus 19 seconds; P < .001; effect size [ES] = 0.83). The perceived fatigue was high, with a score of seven out of ten in both tests (P = .46).

Lifeguards in this study demonstrated the ability to use both tourniquets during aquatic rescues under conditions of fatigue. The tourniquet with the ratcheting-fixation system controlled hemorrhage in less time than the windlass rod-based tourniquet, although achieving complete bleeding control had a low success rate.

Massive hemorrhage (MH) is a growing pathology in military settings and increasingly in civilian settings; it is now considered a public health problem in the United States with large-scale programs. Tourniquets are the fastest and most effective intervention in MH if direct pressure is not effective.

The Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) recognizes a knowledge gap in optimal education techniques for first aid providers. This review aims to describe training and evaluation methods for teaching tourniquet use to both health care and military professionals.

The MEDLINE, CINAHL, WEB of Science, and Scopus databases were reviewed (from 2010 through April 2020). The quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) scale. Studies that met at least 65% of the included items were included. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers.

Ten of the 172 articles found were selected, of which three were randomized clinical trials. Heterogeneity was observed in the design of the studies and in the training and evaluative methods that limit the comparison between studies.

The results suggest that the training strategies studied are effective in improving knowledge, attitudes, and practical skills. There is no universal method, learning is meaningful but research should be directed to find out which ones work best.

Current practice for the treatment of traumatic hemorrhage includes fluid resuscitation and the administration of blood products. The administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) within 8 hours of injury has been shown to significantly reduce mortality in a large, prospective, randomized controlled trial. As a result, TXA is widely used in trauma centres to manage trauma patients with major bleeding. The primary aim of this study was to assess the compliance of TXA administration at a level-one trauma centre in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

We conducted a retrospective medical record review of consecutive adult trauma patients received at the Hamilton General Hospital between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014. Compliance with TXA administration was based on the inclusion criteria of the CRASH–2 trial.

Five hundred and thirty-four of 2,475 trauma patients met the inclusion criteria for TXA administration. Twenty-one patients who received TXA at peripheral hospital prior to their arrival at the level-one trauma centre were excluded from the analysis, and 18 patients were excluded due to missing data. One hundred and thirty-four patients received TXA, representing a compliance rate of 27%. Mean time from arrival to TXA administration was 47 minutes. Compliance increased for those who required massive transfusion and as the number of criteria for TXA administration increased.

Compliance with TXA administration to trauma patients with suspected major bleeding was low. Quality improvement strategies aimed at increasing appropriate use of TXA are warranted.