List Archives

Sat Dec 16 14:47:28 GMT 2006

karim Brohi

first off the military is not "rediscovered" tourniquets(TQ) in the 
manner you say, TQ are to be use in the car under fire phase as self aid 
/boddy aid. TQ is then chance in tactical field care phase to a normal 
bandage. it all in the PHTLS book in part on military medicine where 
tactical combat casualty care(TCCC) is pint out.

on the "no shred of evidence" i think you shut read Butlers et al. paper 
on TCCC, i dont say EBM, but military medicine like trauma care is some 
times "best guess" care. on The Tromsoe Mine Victim Resource Centre ban 
on TQ you right, but if you talk to them about the way militay use TQ, 
thay tell it is not the same. the military is "short time" use and the 
the Tromsoe Mine Victim Resource Centre is banning the long time use and 
as a first resort to use to stopping bleeding.

also TQ is no longer only a stick and belt, there is a lot out there. 
see : http://tacmed.dk/new_page_12.htm, what tromso have see is thing 
like small wires ect.

and then your case, yes it the reason for ATLS and other groups try to 
remove tourniquets from civilian practice, but there is also case out 
there where some in combat and civil life have bee safe by a TQ - but 
that is no way to do EBM case by case.

TQ has a place in military medicine and civilian some times first some 
times last resort, but go against them just because, some dont use them 
as thay  have learn in the military, for last resort!, dont make good EBM.

Frank Hansen
denmark

List Archives

For your convenience, find the Trauma List Archive Below

The case against tourniquets