A comparison study between the Hemorrhage-Arresting Lever-Operated (HALO) tourniquet and the Combat Action Tourniquet (CAT) for the management of exsanguinating extremity hemorrhage.

Ginny R Kaplan, Kevin T Collopy, William F Powers, Katerina Distler, Jerome C Munna, Michael W Hubble
{"title":"A comparison study between the Hemorrhage-Arresting Lever-Operated (HALO) tourniquet and the Combat Action Tourniquet (CAT) for the management of exsanguinating extremity hemorrhage.","authors":"Ginny R Kaplan, Kevin T Collopy, William F Powers, Katerina Distler, Jerome C Munna, Michael W Hubble","doi":"10.5055/ajdm.0491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Tourniquets have been demonstrated to reduce preventable deaths due to exsanguination. However, studies have suggested that the Combat Action Tourniquet (CAT®), a popular prehospital device, may have a 19-30 percent failure rate, thus prompting the creation of a new, lever-operated device for exsanguinating extremity hemorrhage. However, the efficacy of this device compared to the CAT has not been reported.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine efficacy and ease of use of the Hemorrhage Arresting Lever Operated (HALO®) tourniquet compared to the CAT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective crossover observational study where an arterial hemorrhage was created on the right anterior, medial calf of a softly embalmed middle-aged female cadaver. A Kamoer UIP-CK15 continuous high-precision peristaltic pump was sutured to the femoral artery that measured the efflux of simulated bleeding. Participants were given manufacturer instructions for each tourniquet, randomized regarding which device to apply first, and queried about perceived ease of use and preference. All tourniquet applications were timed. Chi-square, McNemar test, t-test, and analysis of variance were used to compare groups. Factors significant in the univariate analysis were used to construct multivariate models of tourniquet success for each device type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Altogether, 135 participants were enrolled in the study, including 75 (55.5 percent) females, 13 (9.6 percent) ethnic minorities, 51 (37.7 percent) paramedics, 19 (14.1 percent) nurses, and 24 (17.7 percent) with prior military service. A total of 43 (31.8 percent) participants were able to achieve hemorrhage cessation with the HALO but not the CAT, compared with 6 (4.4 percent) of the participants who were able to achieve hemorrhage cessation with the CAT but not the HALO (p < .001). For participants who found the lever of the HALO easy to use, successful application of the HALO was 12.3 times more likely (odds ratio [OR] = 12.3; 95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 1.47-103.05). For those clinicians who applied the HALO properly compared with those who did not, hemorrhage cessation was 34.89 times more likely (OR = 34.89; 95 percent CI: 2.12-575.60). In contrast, there were no statistically significant predictors found for successful CAT -application.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With minimal practice, results suggest that the HALO tourniquet may be as effective and easier to use than the CAT tourniquet in the presence of exsanguinating lower extremity hemorrhage. Additional research is required for alternate locations and patient types.</p>","PeriodicalId":40040,"journal":{"name":"American journal of disaster medicine","volume":"19 4","pages":"287-298"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of disaster medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5055/ajdm.0491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Tourniquets have been demonstrated to reduce preventable deaths due to exsanguination. However, studies have suggested that the Combat Action Tourniquet (CAT®), a popular prehospital device, may have a 19-30 percent failure rate, thus prompting the creation of a new, lever-operated device for exsanguinating extremity hemorrhage. However, the efficacy of this device compared to the CAT has not been reported.

Objective: To determine efficacy and ease of use of the Hemorrhage Arresting Lever Operated (HALO®) tourniquet compared to the CAT.

Methods: This was a prospective crossover observational study where an arterial hemorrhage was created on the right anterior, medial calf of a softly embalmed middle-aged female cadaver. A Kamoer UIP-CK15 continuous high-precision peristaltic pump was sutured to the femoral artery that measured the efflux of simulated bleeding. Participants were given manufacturer instructions for each tourniquet, randomized regarding which device to apply first, and queried about perceived ease of use and preference. All tourniquet applications were timed. Chi-square, McNemar test, t-test, and analysis of variance were used to compare groups. Factors significant in the univariate analysis were used to construct multivariate models of tourniquet success for each device type.

Results: Altogether, 135 participants were enrolled in the study, including 75 (55.5 percent) females, 13 (9.6 percent) ethnic minorities, 51 (37.7 percent) paramedics, 19 (14.1 percent) nurses, and 24 (17.7 percent) with prior military service. A total of 43 (31.8 percent) participants were able to achieve hemorrhage cessation with the HALO but not the CAT, compared with 6 (4.4 percent) of the participants who were able to achieve hemorrhage cessation with the CAT but not the HALO (p < .001). For participants who found the lever of the HALO easy to use, successful application of the HALO was 12.3 times more likely (odds ratio [OR] = 12.3; 95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 1.47-103.05). For those clinicians who applied the HALO properly compared with those who did not, hemorrhage cessation was 34.89 times more likely (OR = 34.89; 95 percent CI: 2.12-575.60). In contrast, there were no statistically significant predictors found for successful CAT -application.

Conclusions: With minimal practice, results suggest that the HALO tourniquet may be as effective and easier to use than the CAT tourniquet in the presence of exsanguinating lower extremity hemorrhage. Additional research is required for alternate locations and patient types.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of disaster medicine
American journal of disaster medicine Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: With the publication of the American Journal of Disaster Medicine, for the first time, comes real guidance in this new medical specialty from the country"s foremost experts in areas most physicians and medical professionals have never seen…a deadly cocktail of catastrophic events like blast wounds and post explosion injuries, biological weapons contamination and mass physical and psychological trauma that comes in the wake of natural disasters and disease outbreak. The journal has one goal: to provide physicians and medical professionals the essential informational tools they need as they seek to combine emergency medical and trauma skills with crisis management and new forms of triage.
期刊最新文献
Protection enhancement strategies of potential outbreaks during Hajj. Perceptions regarding second wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic among Indian adults: A cross-sectional study. Agile response to critical need for clinical trial accessibility during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave. Pediatric disaster preparedness curriculum across emergency medicine residencies. Advanced Surgical Skills for Exposure in Trauma (ASSET) course improves military surgeon confidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1