Max Tab,
I have a copy of the 2 articles
-Laboratory Evaluation of Battlefield Tourniquets and Issues Related to the Use of Tourniquets on the Battlefield, both done by U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research.
They compared the CAT, SOFTT, Hemodyne, EMT, LRT, SATS and MAT tourniquets....concluding that the best stoppers of arterial blood flow , i.e., % effective, pain with application, pain/pinch of device, and malfunction was the EMT, CAT and SOFTT.
As they concluded, the EMT which is pneumatic is impractical for forward field use by the individual operator, the CAT having velcro can fail with that and must be , usually, overtightened to have 100% arterial occlusion, and the SOFTT same overtightening problem, smaller width and small excursions per wrap of the windlass.
We put the MAT to the test and it stops arterial flow to the click of the turnkey, only tightening enough to stop flow as per our doppler on the distal artery, no failures that were not the fault of the person 'abusing' it...we tortured it to make it fail.
I certainly believe the data presented and can reproduce almost all of it except not having the problems with the MAT that they did. (no, I have no alignment or association with any company, we remain objective). Hence by endorsement of the MAT...it may never make it into the hands of all active duty personnel, but for civilian tactical medics and the like, I stand behind it.

ss

Sounds like you have more information than I do. I just want to make sure people who need a tourniquet have the best one that they can get, so I pipe in with my .02.

I agree with you...the best one per a "lab" study may or may not be what the field operator may win with........a great test would be to give them all a chance for a trial at Ft. Bragg, etc and let the end user compare them, of course adding the elements of modern technology to ensure the desired results are being achieved.

As with anything it has to be "joe" proof, or as I like to say "bravo" proof. :D It needs to be able to stay on someones gear indeffinately, without having to worry that it will break. Few moving pieces, and as close to indestructable as you can find. Nothing worse than being out in the field, and finding out (usually at the worst possible time) that something doesn't work or is broken, esp with a piece of life saving gear.

As for a field study, I know a lot of units have fielded and are currently using the CAT, and the SOFTT, in the GWOT, haven't heard about the MAT. I'm sure there have been studies done, on how they are doing.

My Medical Director (ER Doc in Philly) was taking part in a study with those things. We got them, went through inservice with them, put them on our rigs, but never used them. They definitely seem a little too much, at least pre-hospital speaking. ER could be a different matter, but SWATSURGEON answered that.