Objective The purpose of this study was to compare laypeoples and professional first responders ability to perform tourniquet application and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during calm and stressful circumstances. Background Life-threatening bleeding is a major cause of death that could be prevented by fast and appropriate first aid interventions. Therefore, laypeople are now being trained in bleeding control skills, transforming them from bystanders to immediate responders. However, critics have questioned whether laypeople are able to perform during more stressful conditions. Method Twenty-four laypersons and 31 professional first responders were tested in two conditions: a calm classroom scenario and a stressful scenario consisting of paintball fire and physical exertion. Stress and workload were assessed along with task performance. Results The experimental manipulation was successful in terms of eliciting stress reactions. Tourniquet application performance did not decline in the stressful condition, but some aspects of CPR performance did for both groups. First responders experienced higher task engagement and lower distress, worry and workload than the laypeople in both the calm and stressful conditions. Conclusion Stress did not affect first responders and laypeople differently in terms of performance effects. Stress should therefore not be considered a major obstacle for teaching bleeding control skills to laypeople. Application Tourniquet application can be taught to laypeople in a short amount of time, and they can perform this skill during stress in controlled settings. Concerns about laypeoples ability to perform under stress should not exclude bleeding control skills from first aid courses for civilian laypeople.

There are currently several educational initiatives to teach first aid courses for medical laypeople, such as the Stop the Bleed campaign. Although much research on educational initiatives has been conducted, there are still factors that remain unexplored, such as the potential effects of blood itself on laypeople’s first aid performance and educational experience. This study investigates such potential effects for performance of the first aid techniques tourniquet application and wound packing, in relation to individual differences in disgust sensitivity and medical fear of blood. The results show that the presence of blood will increase the time a medical layperson takes to apply a tourniquet and pack a wound but does not affect the quality of the aid. Additionally, the disgust sensitivity of the medical layperson was found to predict an increase in application time for the wound packing task, but not the tourniquet application task, when blood was present.

A severe hemorrhage can result in death within minutes, before professional first responders have time to arrive. Thus, intervention by bystanders, who may lack medical training, may be necessary to save a victims life in situations with bleeding injuries. Proper intervention requires that bystanders accurately assess the severity of the injury and respond appropriately. As many bystanders lack tools and training, they are limited in terms of the information they can use in their evaluative process. In hemorrhage situations, visible blood loss may serve as a dominant cue to action. Therefore, understanding how medically untrained bystanders (i.e., laypeople) perceive hemorrhage is important. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the ability of laypeople to visually assess blood loss and to examine factors that may impact accuracy and the classification of injury severity. A total of 125 laypeople watched 78 short videos each of individuals experiencing a hemorrhage. Victim gender, volume of blood lost, and camera perspective were systematically manipulated in the videos. The results revealed that laypeople overestimated small volumes of blood loss (from 50 to 200 ml), and underestimated larger volumes (from 400 to 1900 ml). Larger volumes of blood loss were associated with larger estimation errors. Further, blood loss was underestimated more for female victims than male victims and their hemorrhages were less likely to be classified as life-threatening. These results have implications for training and intervention design.

Introduction First aid performed by immediate responders can be the difference between life and death in the case of trauma with massive bleeding. To develop effective training programs to teach bleeding control to laypersons, it is important to be aware of beliefs and misconceptions people hold on bleeding and severity of bleeding situations. Method A controlled study was conducted in which 175 American college students viewed 78 video clips of simulated bleeding injuries. The volume of blood present (between 0 and 1900 ml), rate of blood flow, and victim gender were systematically varied within participants. Participants were asked to rate injury severity, indicate the appropriate first aid action, and estimate the amount of time until death for the victim. Results Though the Stop the Bleed (R) campaign recommends training laypeople to treat 165 ml of blood loss as life threatening, participants largely rated this volume of blood loss as minimal, mild, or moderate and estimated that the victim had just under one hour to live. Increased blood loss was associated with increased recommendations to use a tourniquet. However, in the 1900 ml conditions, participants still estimated that victims had around 22 minutes to live and approximately 15% recommended direct pressure as the intervention. Severity ratings and recommendations to use a tourniquet were also higher for the male victim than the female victim. Conclusions Injury classification, intervention selection, and time to death-estimations revealed that training interventions should connect classifications of blood loss to appropriate action and focus on perceptions of how much time one has to respond to a bleeding. The study also revealed a gender related bias in terms of injury classification and first aid recommendations. Bleeding control training programs can be designed to address identified biases and misconceptions while building on existing knowledge and commonly used terminology.

Introduction

Immediate responders, or medical laypeople, are believed to be a useful resource in trauma response. However, efficiently providing first aid interventions such as bleeding control, in scenarios with multiple casualties require prioritization among several injured victims. This study aims to explore how medical laypeople prioritize among victims in forced choice scenarios.

Methods

A controlled online experiment was conducted where participants were presented with 276 image pairs of victims with simulated injuries. The amount of blood loss (100 ml, 500 ml, 900 ml), gender (man, woman), skin color (light, dark), facial expression (unconscious, in pain) and wound visibility (visible, covered) was manipulated across the image stimuli.

Results429 participants completed the experiment. The findings show that victims with greater blood loss are more likely to be prioritized than victims with lower blood loss. Response time indicates that blood loss is likely to be a major factor while prioritizing victims. Victim gender, skin color, facial expression and wound visibility all significantly affect prioritization to some extent.

ConclusionThis study shows that apparent prioritization biases are to be expected in the prehospital setting during medical emergencies for medical laypeople. Such biases could be mitigated through training and education.