Opportunity for a Community Health Fair Model of Bleeding Control Training.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic hemorrhage is a prevalent cause of death nationally, with >50% of civilian deaths estimated to be preventable with more timely intervention. This study investigated the efficacy of training large and diverse audiences in bleeding control methods including tourniquets in community health fair settings. METHODS: A booth was utilized for bleeding control training at community health fairs via direct demonstrations of pressure, wound packing, and commercial and improvised tourniquet application followed by hands-on practice. Participants self-rated their perceived abilities while instructors rated the participant competency. RESULTS: 117 community members participated during two fairs, though not every person completed every portion of the training. Average age was 33 (range 6-82) and the majority were female (65.0%). There was no difference in self-perceived skill compared to trainer grading of participant's ability to identify life-threatening bleeding (112 (97.4%) vs 106 (97.2%); P = 1), apply pressure (113 (98.3%) vs 106 (97.2%); P = .68), and pack a wound (102 (88.7%) vs 92 (84.4%); P = .43). No difference in difficulty was noted in placing commercial vs improvised tourniquets (16 (43%) vs 14 (45%); P = .87). However, participants were overconfident in their ability to place tourniquets compared to trainer grading, respectively (112 (98.2%) vs 100 (91.7%; P = .03)). DISCUSSION: Community fair classes provide opportunities to train large and diverse audiences in bleeding control techniques. However, participants overestimated their ability to appropriately apply tourniquets. Further investigation is needed into best educational approaches to optimize the impact of bleeding control kits that have been distributed in multiple states.

Factors Potential Patients Deem Important for Decision-Making in High-Risk Surgical Scenarios.

BACKGROUND: Surgical futility and shared decision-making to proceed with high-risk surgery are challenging for patients and surgeons alike. It is unknown which factors contribute to a patient's decision to undergo high-risk and potentially futile surgery. The clinical perspective, founded in statistical probabilities of survival, could be misaligned with a patient's determination of worthwhile surgery. This study assesses factors most important to patients in pursuing high-risk surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Via anonymous survey, lay participants recruited through Amazon's Mturk were presented high-risk scenarios necessitating emergency surgery. They rated factors (objective risk and quality-of-life domains) in surgical decision-making (0 = not at all, 4 = extremely) and made the decision to pursue surgery based on clinical scenarios. Repeated observations were accounted for via a generalized mixed-effects model and estimated effects of respondent characteristics, scenario factors, and likelihood to recommend surgery. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-six participants completed the survey. Chance of survival to justify surgery averaged 69.3% (SD = 21.3), ranking as the highest determining factor in electing for surgery. Other factors were also considered important in electing for surgery, including the average number of days the patient lived if surgery were and were not completed, functional and pain status after surgery, family member approval, and surgery cost. Postoperative independence was associated with proceeding with surgery (p < 0.001). Recommendations by patient age was moderated by respondent age (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Patients highly value likelihood of survival and postoperative independence in shared decision-making for high-risk surgery. It is important to improve the understanding of surgical futility from a patient's perspective.