Tourniquet application by schoolchildren-a randomized crossover study of three commercially available models.

BACKGROUND: Life-threatening hemorrhage is a major cause of preventable mortality in trauma. Studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of commercial tourniquets when used by adult civilians. However, there are no data about tourniquet application by children.This study's goal is to determine which of three commercially available tourniquets is most effective when used by children. METHODS: A randomized crossover study was conducted in four elementary schools in Montreal to compare three commercially available tourniquets. The study population is primary school children aged 10 to 12 years (5th-6th grade). A total of 181 students were invited to participate; 96 obtained parental approval and were recruited. Participants underwent a short 7-minute video training on the use of three commercial tourniquets and were subsequently given a 2-minute practice period. Students were evaluated on their ability to successfully apply the tourniquet and the time to complete application. After applying all three tourniquets, the students selected their favorite model. The primary outcome is the proportion of successful applications per tourniquet model. Secondary outcomes include time to successful application for each tourniquet model and tourniquet model preference. RESULTS: The mechanical advantage tourniquet (MAT) outperformed the combat application tourniquet (CAT) and the stretch wrap and tuck tourniquet (SWATT) in terms of success rate (MAT, 67%; CAT, 44%; SWATT, 24%; p < 0.0001), time to application (MAT, 57 seconds; CAT, 80 seconds; SWATT, 90 seconds; p < 0.0001), and preference (MAT, 64%; CAT, 30%; SWATT, 6%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In this study, the MAT performs better in terms of success rate, time to application, and preference when used by school-aged children. This study can be helpful when facilities are purchasing tourniquets for use by students.

Medical Student Training in eHealth: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: eHealth is the use of information and communication technologies to enable and improve health and health care services. It is crucial that medical students receive adequate training in eHealth as they will work in clinical environments that are increasingly being enabled by technology. This trend is especially accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic as it complicates traditional face-to-face medical consultations and highlights the need for innovative approaches in health care. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to evaluate the extent and nature of the existing literature on medical student training in eHealth. In detail, it aims to examine what this education consists of, the barriers, enhancing factors, and propositions for improving the medical curriculum. This review focuses primarily on some key technologies such as mobile health (mHealth), the internet of things (IoT), telehealth, and artificial intelligence (AI). METHODS: Searches were performed on 4 databases, and articles were selected based on the eligibility criteria. Studies had to be related to the training of medical students in eHealth. The eligibility criteria were studies published since 2014, from a peer-reviewed journal, and written in either English or French. A grid was used to extract and chart data. RESULTS: The search resulted in 25 articles. The most studied aspect was mHealth. eHealth as a broad concept, the IoT, AI, and programming were least covered. A total of 52% (13/25) of all studies contained an intervention, mostly regarding mHealth, electronic health records, web-based medical resources, and programming. The findings included various barriers, enhancing factors, and propositions for improving the medical curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Trends have emerged regarding the suboptimal present state of eHealth training and barriers, enhancing factors, and propositions for optimal training. We recommend that additional studies be conducted on the following themes: barriers, enhancing factors, propositions for optimal training, competencies that medical students should acquire, learning outcomes from eHealth training, and patient care outcomes from this training. Additional studies should be conducted on eHealth and each of its aspects, especially on the IoT, AI, programming, and eHealth as a broad concept. Training in eHealth is critical to medical practice in clinical environments that are increasingly being enabled by technology. The need for innovative approaches in health care during the COVID-19 pandemic further highlights the relevance of this training.