A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COMBAT APPLICATION TOURNIQUET (CAT) AND THE FIRST 15 WRAPPING TOURNIQUET (FWRAT): EFFECTIVENESS AND USABILITY IN UNTRAINED LAYPERSONS. s.t.m.ammer@amsterdamumc.nl

PW05-05

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COMBAT APPLICATION TOURNIQUET (CAT) AND THE FIRST 15 WRAPPING TOURNIQUET (FWRAT): EFFECTIVENESS AND USABILITY IN UNTRAINED LAYPERSONS.

5

 

Oral or Poster

Tourniquets are critical in pre-hospital hemorrhage control, yet their effectiveness varies based on design and user proficiency. This study compares the Combat Application Tourniquet (CAT) and the First 15 Wrapping Tourniquet (FWRAT) to evaluate their application success, efficiency, and user experience among untrained individuals.

A controlled cross-over study was conducted with 48 untrained participants who applied both tourniquets on a Trauma Leg Task Trainer simulating severe limb bleeding. Participants received ‘just in time’ manufacturer-provided instructions and were timed while attempting to stop the simulated hemorrhage. Objective measures included application success rates, time to bleeding control, and errors. Subjective assessments captured ease of use, instruction clarity, and user confidence.

The CAT demonstrated a significantly higher success rate (81.3%) compared to the FWRAT (14.6%) and was applied faster across all groups. The FWRAT exhibited more positioning errors (31 vs. 8 for CAT), primarily due to slippage (93.5% of failures). Participants found CAT instructions clearer (89.6% agreement vs. 45.8% for FWRAT). Post-experiment surveys revealed a strong preference for CAT in terms of usability, effectiveness, and confidence in emergency application.

The CAT is significantly more effective, easier to use, and preferred over the FWRAT for emergency hemorrhage control on a Trauma Leg Task Trainer. The findings highlight the importance of intuitive tourniquet design and hands-on training for untrained laypersons. Future research should focus on improving tourniquet usability and refining instructional materials.