Assessing the Current Generation of Tourniquets
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 22, 2026
A Training and Testing System for Performing Vascular Reconstruction In Vitro
Published on: October 26, 2019
Shimon Katsnelson1, Jessie Oppenheimer1, Rafi Gerrasi2
1Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Research in Military Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel Defense Forces Medical Corps, POB 12272, Jerusalem 91120, Israel.
Introduction:
Tourniquet application is an urgent life-saving procedure. Previous studies demonstrated several drawbacks in tourniquet design and application methods that limit their efficacy; among them, loose application of the device before windlass twisting is a main pitfall. A new generation of modern combat tourniquets was developed to overcome these pitfalls. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of three new tourniquet designs: the CAT Generation 7 (CAT7), the SAM Extremity Tourniquet (SAM-XT), and the SOF Tactical Tourniquet Wide (SOFTT-W) as well as its correlation to the degree of slack.
Materials And Methods:
The three tourniquet models were applied in a randomized sequence on a HapMed leg tourniquet trainer, simulating an above-the-knee traumatic amputation by 60 military medicine track cadets. Applied pressure, hemorrhage control status, time until the bleeding stopped, estimated blood volume loss, and slack were measured.
Results:
The mean (±SD) pressure applied using the SAM-XT (186 mmHg ±63) or the CAT7 (175 mmHg ±79) was significantly higher compared to the pressure applied by the SOFTT-W (104 mmHg ±101, P < 0.017), with no significant difference between the first two (P > 0.05). Hemorrhage control rate was similar (P > 0.05) with SAM-XT (73.3%) and CAT7 (67.7%), and both were significantly better than the SOFTT-W (35%, P < 0.017). Slack was similar between CAT7 and SAM-XT (5.2 mm ± 3.4 vs. 5 mm ± 3.5, P > 0.05), yet significantly lower compared to the SOFTT-W (9 mm ± 5, P < 0.017). A strong negative correlation was found between slack and hemorrhage control rate (3.2 mm ± 1.5 mm in success vs. 10.5 mm ± 3.4 mm in failure, P < 0.001) and applied pressure (Pearson's correlation coefficient of -0.83, P < 0.001).
Conclusions:
Both SAM-XT and CAT7 demonstrated a better pressure profile and hemorrhage control rate compared to SOFTT-W, with no significant difference between the two. The better outcome measures were strongly correlated to less slack.
