000125842 001__ 125842 000125842 005__ 20230519145632.0 000125842 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1007/s00268-021-06149-6 000125842 0248_ $$2sideral$$a133322 000125842 037__ $$aART-2021-133322 000125842 041__ $$aeng 000125842 100__ $$aYánez Benítez, Carlos 000125842 245__ $$aExtremity tourniquet training at high seas 000125842 260__ $$c2021 000125842 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted 000125842 5203_ $$aBackground Future navy officers require unique training for emergency medical response in the isolated maritime environment. The authors issued a workshop on extremity bleeding control, using four different commercial extremity tourniquets onboard a training sail ship. The purposes were to assess participants' perceptions of this educational experience and evaluate self-application simplicity while navigating on high seas. Methods A descriptive observational study was conducted as part of a workshop issued to volunteer training officers. A post-workshop survey collected their perceptions about the workshops' content usefulness and adequacy, tourniquet safety, self-application simplicity, and device preference. Tourniquet preference was measured by frequency count while the rest of the studied variables on a one-to-ten Likert scale. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for the studied variables, and application simplicity means compared using the ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Results Fifty-one Spanish training naval officers, aged 20 or 21, perceived high sea workshop content’s usefulness, adequacy, and safety level at 8.6/10, 8.7/10, and 7.5/10, respectively. As for application simplicity, CAT and SAM-XT were rated equally with a mean of 8.5, followed by SWAT (7.9) and RATS (6.9), this one statistically different from the rest (p < 0.01). Windlass types were preferred by 94%. Conclusions The training sail ship’s extremity bleeding control workshop was perceived as useful and its content adequate by the participating midshipmen. Windlass types were regarded as easier to apply than elastic counterparts. They were also preferred by nine out of every ten participants. 000125842 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aAll rights reserved$$uhttp://www.europeana.eu/rights/rr-f/ 000125842 590__ $$a3.282$$b2021 000125842 591__ $$aSURGERY$$b65 / 214 = 0.304$$c2021$$dQ2$$eT1 000125842 592__ $$a0.874$$b2021 000125842 593__ $$aSurgery$$c2021$$dQ1 000125842 594__ $$a5.1$$b2021 000125842 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion 000125842 700__ $$aRibeiro, Marcelo A. F. 000125842 700__ $$aKhan, Mansoor 000125842 700__ $$aLorente-Aznar, Teófilo 000125842 700__ $$aAsensio, Esther 000125842 700__ $$aLópez, José Antonio 000125842 700__ $$aMartínez, Isabel 000125842 700__ $$aBlas, Juan L. 000125842 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-4437-2581$$aGüemes, Antonio$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza 000125842 7102_ $$11013$$2090$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Cirugía$$cÁrea Cirugía 000125842 773__ $$g45, 8 (2021), 2408-2414$$pWorld j. surg.$$tWORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY$$x0364-2313 000125842 8564_ $$s864703$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/125842/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada 000125842 8564_ $$s1841885$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/125842/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada 000125842 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:125842$$particulos$$pdriver 000125842 951__ $$a2023-05-18-16:20:50 000125842 980__ $$aARTICLE