Medical scenario 1

[undomesticdiva]

I work in the building trade and to be honest superglue gets used far more often than plasters on most of the sites I'm on.

Does it not burn/sting the skin?

[Holomon]

Does it not burn/sting the skin?

It can hurt like hell and can also cause scarring, but people still use it. I'd just not recommend it, better to take time to clean the wound and dress it properly, provided you're not stuck in the wilderness with only a tube of superglue for comfort. In which case, how the hell did that happen?!?!?

[Malthouse]

The point about raising legs was in the context of shock.

Ahh sorry, must have missed the context. If I may ask, who was running the course?

No worries, it came from the rests council IIRC. It is filtering down through instructors but is also one of a number of bigger changes coming later this year as well.

[Holomon]

No worries, it came from the rests council IIRC. It is filtering down through instructors but is also one of a number of bigger changes coming later this year as well.

It'll be interesting to see what the other changes are and who it is proposing them - they usually derive from medical studies and it's been a fairly slow couple of years in that respect.
I've got a conference in June that might clarify things, but in the meantime will keep an eye out.

[preparedsurrey]

I work in the building trade and to be honest superglue gets used far more often than plasters on most of the sites I'm on.

Does it not burn/sting the skin?

Not in my experiance certainly no more than the pain of the wound you are closing! I personally use carpenters mitre fix as thats what I carry (its a superglue with a seperate spray on activator to set it virtually instantly), not sure if that makes any difference or not. I also apparently have quite a high pain threshold.

As for scarring i've more than a few small scars anyway so its not something that would worry me anywhere other than my face.

[Tackleberry]

I'm interested in the tourniquet only staying on for 6 hours, I have just completed a First person on scene, first responders course, taken by 2 ex military instructors with recent combat experience. They taught that a torniquet can be left on for 24 hours without the limb suffering from lack of blood/oxygen. If this was a SHTF situation and it's a choice of torniquet or bleed out, I will torniquet the casualty. 1 it will help if you have to find where the catastrophic bleed is coming from mad 2 it gives you time to fix the bleed.
However other FPOS guys at work that have been trained by non ex military instructors were of the opinion of a torniquet is the all else has failed cause of action.
I suppose it depends on the instructors experience at the end of the day.

[Holomon]

I'm interested in the tourniquet only staying on for 6 hours, I have just completed a First person on scene, first responders course, taken by 2 ex military instructors with recent combat experience. They taught that a torniquet can be left on for 24 hours without the limb suffering from lack of blood/oxygen. If this was a SHTF situation and it's a choice of torniquet or bleed out, I will torniquet the casualty. 1 it will help if you have to find where the catastrophic bleed is coming from mad 2 it gives you time to fix the bleed.
However other FPOS guys at work that have been trained by non ex military instructors were of the opinion of a torniquet is the all else has failed cause of action.
I suppose it depends on the instructors experience at the end of the day.

6 hours?!?!? The rule for a tourniquet is you take it off as soon as possible!
Bearing in mind there may be degeneration or necrosis from anywhere after an hour after application, you want to get it off as soon as possible. In surgery it's generally accepted that 1 - 3 hours will have a low risk (low risk mind you, not no risk) but that can usually also be managed with proper meds and observation.

6 hours is pretty much the benchmark for muscle being unsalvageable, without an exceptional set of circumstances, and even then would probably result in a severe loss of function without extensive surgery if not complete loss.

I don't know who the hell told you that you can leave a tourniquet on for 24 hours, but that is just ridiculous and I would strongly recommend you question what you were taught and who it was that taught it to you.
You don't have to take my word for it, I'm sure a quick google or even a look at the CAT instructions online somewhere will say the same.

[Lanky Yankee]

I don't know who the hell told you that you can leave a tourniquet on for 24 hours, but that is just ridiculous and I would strongly recommend you question what you were taught and who it was that taught it to you.
You don't have to take my word for it, I'm sure a quick google or even a look at the CAT instructions online somewhere will say the same.

I've got to agree with Holomon on this. If your thinking about a touriquet then you better have a surgeon standing by. Not only will you have major tissue damage but necrosis will set in and that will be a long painful death.

[Tackleberry]

We questioned it as well, but we're told that in the Afghan combat torniquets have been regularly used and kept on for upto 24 hours. My own personal thought would be to torniquet for a catastrophic bleed, but to release it every hour for a short period.
There is a huge difference between military and civilian views on torniquets, I would hope that the powers that be can standardise the issue, especially as you can pick up a CAT for less than £20.

My main thought would be how bad has the SHTF and how long before I could get proper medical aid. If the casualty has a catastrophic bleed and help is a long way off, is it better to torniquet or to let them slowly bleed out before the wound can clot?

[aldhelm]

My own personal thought would be to torniquet for a catastrophic bleed, but to release it every hour for a short period.

That's what I was taught many moons ago, but only when ambulances aren't readily available and it's likely to be a while before one gets to the casualty.