Whole blood (WB) transfusion represents a promising resuscitation strategy for trauma patients. However, a paucity of data surrounding the optimal incorporation of WB into resuscitation strategies persists. We hypothesized that traumatically injured patients who received a greater proportion of WB compared with blood product components during their resuscitative efforts would have improved early mortality outcomes and decreased transfusion requirements compared with those who received a greater proportion of blood product components.
More than 500 000 laypeople in the United States have been trained in hemorrhage control, including tourniquet application, under the Stop the Bleed campaign. However, it is unclear whether after hemorrhage control training participants become proficient in a specific type of tourniquet or can also use other tourniquets effectively.
Objective
To assess whether participants completing the American College of Surgeons Bleeding Control Basic (B-Con) training with Combat Application Tourniquets (CATs) can effectively apply bleeding control principles using other tourniquet types (commercial and improvised).
Design, Setting, and Participants
This nonblinded, crossover, sequential randomized clinical trial with internal control assessed a volunteer sample of laypeople who attended a B-Con course at Gillette Stadium and the Longwood Medical Area in Boston, Massachusetts, for correct application of each of 5 different tourniquet types immediately after B-Con training from April 4, 2018, to October 9, 2018. The order of application varied for each participant using randomly generated permutated blocks.
Interventions
Full B-Con course, including cognitive and skill sessions, that taught bleeding care, wound pressure and packing, and CAT application.
Main Outcomes and Measures
Correct tourniquet application (applied pressure of ≥250 mm Hg with a 2-minute time cap) in a simulated scenario for 3 commercial tourniquets (Special Operation Forces Tactical Tourniquet, Stretch-Wrap-and-Tuck Tourniquet, and Rapid Application Tourniquet System) and improvised tourniquet compared with correct CAT application as an internal control using 4 pairwise Bonferroni-corrected comparisons with the McNemar test.
Results
A total of 102 participants (50 [49.0%] male; median [interquartile range] age, 37.5 [27.0-53.0] years) were included in the study. Participants correctly applied the CAT at a significantly higher rate (92.2%) than all other commercial tourniquet types (Special Operation Forces Tactical Tourniquet, 68.6%; Stretch-Wrap-and-Tuck Tourniquet, 11.8%; Rapid Application Tourniquet System, 11.8%) and the improvised tourniquet (32.4%) (P < .001 for each pairwise comparison). When comparing tourniquets applied correctly, all tourniquet types had higher estimated blood loss, had longer application time, and applied less pressure than the CAT.
Conclusions and Relevance
The B-Con principles for correct CAT application are not fully translatable to other commercial or improvised tourniquet types. This study demonstrates a disconnect between the B-Con course and tourniquet designs available for bystander first aid, potentially stemming from the lack of consensus guidelines. These results suggest that current B-Con trainees may not be prepared to care for bleeding patients as tourniquet design evolves.
In Brief Objectives: To determine whether minority trauma patients are more commonly treated at trauma centers (TCs) with worse observed-to-expected (O/E) survival. Background: Racial disparities in survival after traumatic injury have been described. However, the mechanisms that lead to these inequities are not well understood. Methods: Analysis of level I/II TCs included in the National Trauma Data Bank 2007–2010. White, Black, and Hispanic patients 16 years or older sustaining blunt/penetrating injuries with an Injury Severity Score of 9 or more were included. TCs with 50% or more Hispanic or Black patients were classified as predominantly minority TCs. Multivariate logistic regression adjusting for several patient/injury characteristics was used to predict the expected number of deaths for each TC. O/E mortality ratios were then generated and used to rank individual TCs as low (O/E <1), intermediate, or high mortality (O/E >1). Results: A total of 556,720 patients from 181 TCs were analyzed; 86 TCs (48%) were classified as low mortality, 6 (3%) intermediate, and 89 (49%) as high mortality. More of the predominantly minority TCs [(82% (22/27) vs 44% (67/154)] were classified as high mortality (P < 0.001). Approximately 64% of Black patients (55,673/87,575) were treated at high-mortality TCs compared with 54% Hispanics (32,677/60,761) and 41% Whites (165,494/408,384) (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Minority trauma patients are clustered at hospitals with significantly higher-than-expected mortality. Black and Hispanic patients treated at low-mortality hospitals have a significantly lower odds of death than similar patients treated at high-mortality hospitals. Differences in TC outcomes and quality of care may partially explain trauma outcomes disparities. Mechanisms leading to racial disparities in trauma outcomes remain ill characterized. We describe that minority trauma patients are clustered at hospitals with significantly higher-than-expected mortality. Differences in trauma center outcomes and quality of care may partially explain inequalities in survival after injury.
Racial disparities in survival after trauma are well described for patients younger than 65 years.Similar information among older patients is lacking because existing trauma databases do not include important patient comorbidity information.OBJECTIVE To determine whether racial disparities in trauma survival persist in patients 65 years or older.