Abstract:Background: Previous research has shown that external hemorrhage from proximal leg amputations and junctional sites represents 19.2% of potentially survivable lethal hemorrhage. A recent effort to address this problem has resulted in the development of various junctional tourniquets. This study assessed and compared two Tactical Combat Casualty Care Committee-approved junctional tourniquets, the Combat Ready Clamp (CRoC) and the Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool (JETT), to contribute to their future development and to better inform on the decisions for device selection by military units. Aims of the study also were to provide concrete feedback and suggestions on how to effectively apply the devices. Methods: Via a specific questionnaire, 75 international attendees of the International Special Training Centre Medical Branch Special Operations Forces Advanced Medical First Responder course evaluated the CRoC and the JETT on different parameters. Both devices were tested objectively through timed applications aimed at stopping unilateral lower-extremity distal pulse on 33 of these 75 students, verified by palpation by Medical Branch instructors. Subjective and objective data were examined for mutual correlation. Results: Users ranked the JETT higher than the CRoC on all parameters, including effectiveness on the battlefield (ρ < .001), ease of use (ρ < .039), speed of application (ρ < .001), and not slipping in use (ρ < .001), although the difference on other parameters such as effectiveness in hemorrhage control was not statistically significant. Considering all parameters together, the JETT was evaluated as a better device than the CRoC (ρ < .001). The application time measurement suggested that the JETT was applied faster (by approximately 15 seconds on average; ρ < .001). The fastest CRoC and JETT applications were 37 and 29 seconds, respectively. The JETT was not easier to use or more effective than the CRoC; there was a 9% failure rate of the JETT occluding a unilateral common femoral artery. The JETT's efficacy in occluding a unilateral common femoral artery can be compromised if the device's pelvic binder is not sufficiently tightened prior to threading the T-handled pad. The CRoC's application time can be drastically reduced if the device is kept assembled and firm pressure is immediately asserted upon placement on the intended location through the vertical arm, then threading the device. Both devices were applied safely; no adverse effects were reported during or after application. Conclusion: Even though the JETT might be preferred by military medical providers, the CRoC still has merits. As both devices proved to occlude the arterial flow in no less than 54 seconds on average, they could be used to supplement direct pressure and wound packing, the latter two still being considered the immediate actions for inguinal bleeding control. Considering that the CRoC and the JETT can be applied in as little as 37 and 29 seconds, respectively, users should be effectively trained and entirely proficient on either device to justify their election as the primary countermeasure to hemorrhage not amenable to regular tourniquets.

Development and Prospects of the Non-compressive Hemostatic Devices Being used in Disaster Fields.

Torso hemorrhage: noncompressible? never say never

Evaluation and Testing of Junctional Tourniquets by Special Operation Forces Personnel: A Comparison of the Combat Ready Clamp and the Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool

Prehospital Aortic Blood Flow Control Techniques for Non-Compressible Traumatic Hemorrhage

Emerging hemostatic materials for non-compressible hemorrhage control

Effective approaches to address noncompressible torso hemorrhage

Implementing Tourniquet Conversion Guidelines for Civilian EMS and Prehospital Organizations : A Case Report and Review

Developing "Herd Immunity" in a Civilian Community Through Incorporation of "Just-In-Time" Tourniquet Application Training

[Surgical management of severe noncompressible torso and organ hemorrhages]

Hemorrhage Control: Lessons Learned From the Battlefield Use of Hemostatic Agents That Can Be Applied in a Hospital Setting

Endovascular Versus Open: Emergency Department Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta or Thoracotomy for Management of Post-Injury Noncompressible Torso Hemorrhage

Biomaterials and Advanced Technologies for Hemostatic Management of Bleeding

Progress on Combat Damage Control Resuscitation/surgery and Its Application in the Chinese People's Liberation Army

A new cluster strategy for traumatic hemorrhage control

Red Alert: It Is Time to Strengthen the Medical Knowledge of Noncompressible Torso Hemorrhage Among Health-Care Workers

Aquatic Feasibility of Limbs Application of Tourniquets (AFLAT) during a Lifeguard Water Rescue: A Simulation Pilot Study

Combined effect of intermittent hemostasis and a modified external hemorrhage control device in a lethal swine model

Who needs a tourniquet? And who does not? Lessons learned from a review of tourniquet use in the Russo-Ukrainian war

Engineering Low Volume Resuscitants for the Prehospital Care of Severe Hemorrhagic Shock

Traumatic intra-abdominal hemorrhage control: has current technology tipped the balance toward a role for prehospital intervention?

Ruggedized Self-Propelling Hemostatic Gauze Delivers Low Dose of Thrombin and Systemic Tranexamic Acid and Achieves High Survival in Swine With Junctional Hemorrhage