of 23
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
1/231 of 23
TCCC Equipment Evaluation
1. Have you treated combat casualties on the battlefield at or near the point of wounding
with significant injuries directly related to a combat action (such as blasts, gunshot,
shrapnel, etc.)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes, no previous evaluation
submitted electronically100.0% 264
Yes, resubmitting because
previous submission only partially
completed
0.0% 0
Yes, but already submitted a
completed evaluation electronically 0.0% 0
No 0.0% 0
If resubmitting, list reason why: 0
answered question 264
skipped question 0
2. Please provide the following information:
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name:100.0% 263
Email Address:100.0% 263
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
2/232 of 23
3. What is your rate/rank?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
E1-E3 8.0% 21
E4-E5 38.8% 102
E6-E7 45.2% 119
E8-E9 8.0% 21
answered question 263
skipped question 1
4. What is your branch of service?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Army 40.7% 107
Navy 47.5% 125
Air Force 11.8% 31
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
3/233 of 23
5. Which of the following best describes your combat medical qualifications?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Army Combat Medic (68W) 34.5% 90
Ranger Medic 1.9% 5
Special Forces 18-D Medic 3.4% 9
Navy Corpsman (8404) 44.8% 117
Navy Corpsman (MARSOC
8403/8427)1.9% 5
Seal Operator with SOCM training 0.0% 0
Air Force Pararescueman 11.9% 31
Other 1.5% 4
Other (please specify)24
answered question 261
skipped question 3
6. In what countries have you treated combat casualties? (Check all that apply)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Afghanistan 68.7% 178
Iraq 58.3% 151
Other 11.2% 29
Other (please specify)21
answered question 259
skipped question 5
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
4/234 of 23
7. Please provide the following:
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Estimated number of combat
casualties you treated ( eg. 5) 73.15 19,166 262
Over how many deployments (eg.
3) 2.50 654 262
Year you did/will return from
your most recent deployment
(eg. 2011)2,009.73 522,530 260
answered question 262
skipped question 2
8. Did you use a tourniquet to treat your casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 81.4% 214
No 18.6% 49
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
5/235 of 23
9. Estimate the number of times you used the following tourniquets on your casualties (eg.
5). If item not used leave box blank.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Combat Application Tourniquet
(CAT) 12.86 2,661 207
SOF Tactical Tourniquet (SOFT-T)13.89 1,000 72
NATO Tourniquet4.17 75 18
MET Tourniquet3.00 3 1
Other (List)6.22 112 18
answered question 213
skipped question 51
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
6/236 of 23
10. The tourniquet(s) I used was/were effective in stopping life-threatening extremity
bleeding (Note: Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used)
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Combat Application Tourniquet
(CAT)3.9% (8) 2.9% (6) 1.4% (3) 47.8%
(99)
44.0%
(91)4.25 207
SOF Tactical Tourniquet (SOFTT) 1.4% (1) 0.0% (0) 2.8% (2)29.2%
(21)
66.7%
(48)4.60 72
NATO Tourniquet 0.0% (0) 5.6% (1) 11.1% (2) 27.8% (5)55.6%
(10)4.33 18
MET Tourniquet 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)100.0%
(1)0.0% (0) 4.00 1
Other (List) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 10.5% (2) 36.8% (7)52.6%
(10)4.42 19
Comments: (Ease of application, specific problems, strong points, performance in cold/heat/rain, etc.) Specify
item in your comments. 87
answered question 213
skipped question 51
11. Did you use a hemostatic agents (e.g. combat gauze) on your casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 52.1% 136
No 47.9% 125
answered question 261
skipped question 3
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
7/237 of 23
12. Estimate the number of times you used the following on your casualties (eg. 2). Leave
box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Combat Gauze15.50 1,845 119
ChitoGauze12.91 284 22
Celox Gauze8.89 80 9
Others (List)22.35 514 23
answered question 137
skipped question 127
13. The hemostatic agent(s) I used was/were effective at stopping severe external bleeding
(Note: Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used )
Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neutral AgreeStrongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Combat Gauze 0.8% (1) 2.5% (3) 4.2% (5)42.9%
(51)
49.6%
(59)4.38 119
ChitoGauze 4.5% (1) 4.5% (1) 13.6% (3)45.5%
(10)31.8% (7) 3.95 22
Celox Gauze 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 55.6% (5) 44.4% (4) 4.44 9
Other 4.3% (1) 8.7% (2) 26.1% (6) 30.4% (7) 30.4% (7) 3.74 23
Comments: (Ease of application, specific problems, specific strong points, performance in cold/heat/rain, etc.)
Specify item in your comments. 58
answered question 137
skipped question 127
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
8/238 of 23
14. Did you use an elastic wound bandage to treat your casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 85.6% 225
No 14.4% 38
answered question 263
skipped question 1
15. Estimate how many times you used the following on your casualties (eg. 4). Leave box
blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Israeli bandage21.96 2,811 128
Trauma Wound Dressing16.97 1,035 61
Emergency Trauma Dressing
(NARP IFAK) 20.72 1,264 61
H-Bandage10.00 760 76
Generic elastic bandage (ace wrap)22.18 3,083 139
Bandage Kit Elastic (standard
issue) 37.25 1,341 36
Others (List)11.52 265 23
answered question 226
skipped question 38
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
9/239 of 23
16. The elastic wound bandage(s) that I used was/were effective at controlling the bleeding
(Note: Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used)
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Israeli bandage 0.0% (0) 1.5% (2) 3.1% (4) 49.2%(64)
46.2%
(60)4.40 130
Trauma Wound Dressing 0.0% (0) 1.6% (1) 8.2% (5)60.7%
(37)
29.5%
(18)4.18 61
Emergency Trauma Dressing
(NARP IFAK)0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 6.7% (4)
45.0%
(27)
48.3%
(29)4.42 60
H-Bandage 0.0% (0) 2.6% (2) 10.4% (8)40.3%
(31)
46.8%
(36)4.31 77
Generic elastic bandage (ace wrap) 1.4% (2) 2.2% (3) 9.4% (13)44.9%
(62)
42.0%
(58)4.24 138
Bandage Kit Elastic (standard
issue)2.7% (1) 8.1% (3) 16.2% (6)
45.9%
(17)
27.0%
(10)3.86 37
Others (List) 8.7% (2) 4.3% (1) 13.0% (3) 30.4% (7)43.5%
(10)3.96 23
Comments: (Ease of application, specific problems, specific strong points, persformance in cold/heat/rain,
etc.) Specify item in your comments. 75
answered question 226
skipped question 38
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
10/2310 of 23
17. Did you use an airway device to treat your casualties who did not have direct trauma to
the airway?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes
58.2% 153
No 41.8% 110
answered question 263
skipped question 1
18. Estimate how many times you used the following on your casualties (eg. 2). Leave box
blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Nasopharyngeal airway12.42 1,577 127
LMA3.44 31 9
Intubating LMA 3.18 35 11
King LT8.95 591 66
Endotracheal tube12.67 773 61
answered question 154
skipped question 110
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
11/2311 of 23
19. The airway device(s) that I used was/were effective in establishing an airway in
casualties who did not have direct trauma to the airway (Note: Only rate items you used and
leave rating blank for items not used)
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Nasopharyngeal airway 0.8% (1) 3.2% (4)19.8%
(25)
45.2%
(57)
31.0%
(39)4.02 126
LMA 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 11.1% (1) 55.6% (5) 33.3% (3) 4.22 9
Intubating LMA 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 8.3% (1) 41.7% (5) 50.0% (6) 4.42 12
King LT 0.0% (0) 1.5% (1) 10.8% (7)46.2%
(30)
41.5%
(27)4.28 65
Endotracheal tube 1.6% (1) 1.6% (1) 3.3% (2) 31.1%(19)
62.3%(38)
4.51 61
Comments: (Ease of use, most difficult aspect of airway, performance in cold/heat/rain, etc.) Specify items in
your comments. 45
answered question 153
skipped question 111
20. Did you perform a surgical airway to treat your casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 25.6% 67
No 74.4% 195
answered question 262
skipped question 2
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
12/2312 of 23
21. Estimate how many times you used the following to perform a surgical airway on your
casualties (eg. 2). Leave box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
TAC MED Surgical Airway Kit1.29 9 7
CricKit2.33 84 36
No Kit - individual items packed
together 3.70 163 44
Other3.00 9 3
answered question 68
skipped question 196
22. The surgical airway kit(s) that I used was/were effective in establishing a patent airway
(Note: Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used.)
Stronglydisagree
Disagree Neutral Agree StronglyAgree
RatingAverage
ResponseCount
TAC MED Surgical Airway Kit 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 14.3% (1) 42.9% (3) 42.9% (3) 4.29 7
CricKit 5.6% (2) 0.0% (0) 2.8% (1)50.0%
(18)
41.7%
(15)4.22 36
No Kit - individual items packed
together2.3% (1) 0.0% (0) 4.5% (2)
25.0%
(11)
68.2%
(30)4.57 44
Other (List in comment box) 33.3% (1) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 66.7% (2) 3.67 3
Comments: (Ease of use, most difficult aspect of airway, performance in cold/heat/rain, etc.) Specify items in
your comments. 30
answered question 68
skipped question 196
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
13/2313 of 23
23. Did you perform a needle decompression on your casualties for a suspected tension
pneumothorax?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 43.0% 113
No 57.0% 150
answered question 263
skipped question 1
24. Estimate how many times did you used the following on your casualties for needle
decompression (eg. 2). Leave box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
14 gauge 3.25 inch needle5.41 606 112
Other4.08 49 12
answered question 115
skipped question 149
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
14/2314 of 23
25. The needle(s) that I used was/were effective in performing a needle decompression for
a suspected tension pneumothorax (Only rate items you used). (Note: Needle
decompression does not benefit all casualties with suspected tension pneumothorax even
if performed correctly)
Strongly
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
14 gauge 3.25 inch 1.8% (2) 0.9% (1)11.6%
(13)
32.1%
(36)
53.6%
(60)4.35 112
Other (List in comment box) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 25.0% (3) 33.3% (4) 41.7% (5) 4.17 12
Comments: (Ease of use, specific problems, etc.)36
answered question 115
skipped question 149
26. Did you use a chest seal to treat a sucking chest wound (open pneumothorax) in your
casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 52.9% 139
No 47.1% 124
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
15/2315 of 23
27. Estimate how many time you used the following chest seals on your casualties (eg. 2).
Leave box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Halo5.68 216 38
Hyfin6.48 350 54
H+H11.00 44 4
Asherman6.03 525 87
Bolin6.31 303 48
Other5.88 141 24
answered question 139
skipped question 125
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
16/2316 of 23
28. The chest seal(s) I used was/were effective at sealing the sucking chest wound (Note:
Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used)
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Halo 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 2.6% (1) 23.1% (9) 74.4%(29)
4.72 39
Hyf in 1.9% (1) 3.7% (2) 3.7% (2)46.3%
(25)
44.4%
(24)4.28 54
H+H 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 0.0% (0) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 3.00 4
Asherman16.3%
(14)
27.9%
(24)
16.3%
(14)
31.4%
(27)8.1% (7) 2.87 86
Bolin 8.2% (4) 6.1% (3) 16.3% (8) 42.9%(21)
26.5%(13)
3.73 49
Other (List in comment box) 0.0% (0) 4.0% (1) 20.0% (5) 32.0% (8)44.0%
(11)4.16 25
Comments: (Ease of use, adhesion, specific problems, performance in cold/heat/rain/sand, etc.) Specify items
in your comments. 81
answered question 139
skipped question 125
29. Have you used an intraosseous device in treating combat casualties?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 30.4% 80
No 69.6% 183
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
17/2317 of 23
30. Estimate how many times did you used the following IO device on your casualties (eg.
2). Leave box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Pyng Fast-14.69 253 54
EZ-IO - Sternal2.20 44 20
EZ-IO - Tibial (Manual)4.11 37 9
EZ-IO - Tibial (Drill)4.85 97 20
EZ-IO - Humeral (Manual)1.00 2 2
EZ-IO - Humeral (Drill)4.80 72 15
Bone Injection Gun1.80 9 5
Other18.50 37 2
answered question 80
skipped question 184
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
18/2318 of 23
31. The intraosseous device (s) I used was/were effective in establishing IO vascular
access (Note: Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used )
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Pyng Fast-1 1.8% (1) 5.5% (3) 5.5% (3)29.1%
(16)58.2%
(32)4.36 55
EZ-IO - Sternal 0.0% (0) 5.3% (1) 15.8% (3) 36.8% (7) 42.1% (8) 4.16 19
EZ-IO - Tibial (Manual) 0.0% (0) 12.5% (1) 0.0% (0) 50.0% (4) 37.5% (3) 4.13 8
EZ-IO - Tibial (Drill) 0.0% (0) 14.3% (3) 4.8% (1)47.6%
(10)33.3% (7) 4.00 21
EZ-IO - Humeral (Manual) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 50.0% (1) 50.0% (1) 4.50 2
EZ-IO - Humeral (Drill) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 7.1% (1) 57.1% (8) 35.7% (5) 4.29 14
Bone Injection Gun 33.3% (2) 16.7% (1) 16.7% (1) 16.7% (1) 16.7% (1) 2.67 6
Other 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)100.0%
(2)0.0% (0) 4.00 2
Comments: (Ease of use, time to insert, reliability of access, specific problems, performance in cold/heat/rain,
etc.) Specify items in your comments. 27
answered question 80
skipped question 184
32. Did you administer narcotic pain medications or ketamine to treat your casualties'
severe pain in the prehospital setting?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 70.3% 185
No 29.7% 78
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
19/2319 of 23
33. Estimate how many times you used the following in the prehospital setting on your
casualties (eg. 2). Leave box blank for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Oral Transmucosal Fentanyl Citrate
(OFTC) Lozenges 800 mcg 7.06 381 54
IV Morphine14.63 1,419 97
IM Morphine9.47 1,278 135
Ketamine12.57 528 42
Other23.85 644 27
answered question 185
skipped question 79
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
20/2320 of 23
34. The pain medication(s) that I administered to my casualties in the prehospital setting
was/were effective at providing rapid relief of severe pain (Note: Only rate items you used
and leave rating blank for items not used)
Strongly
disagreeDisagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Oral Transmucosal Fentanyl
Lozenges3.8% (2) 5.8% (3) 11.5% (6)
38.5%
(20)
40.4%
(21)4.06 52
IV Morphine 2.1% (2) 2.1% (2) 5.2% (5)46.4%
(45)
44.3%
(43)4.29 97
IM Morphine 0.7% (1) 6.7% (9) 9.6% (13)43.0%
(58)
40.0%
(54)4.15 135
Ketamine 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0)29.3%
(12)
70.7%
(29)
4.71 41
Other (list in comment box) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 7.4% (2)37.0%
(10)
55.6%
(15)4.48 27
Comments: (Side effects noted, time to effective pain relief, ease of use, etc.) Specify items in your
comments. 69
answered question 185
skipped question 79
35. Did you use devices, blankets, or other equipment to treat or prevent hypothermia?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 71.1% 187
No 28.9% 76
answered question 263
skipped question 1
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
21/2321 of 23
36. Estimate how many times you used the following on your casualties (eg. 2). Leave blank
for items not used.
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Ready Heat Blanket26.07 1,408 54
Blizzard Survival Blanket29.29 1,230 42
Heat Reflective Shell23.24 2,022 87
Wool Blanket33.38 3,738 112
Poncho19.00 570 30
Poncho Liner9.27 473 51
Human Remains Pouch17.75 497 28
Other11.36 250 22
answered question 187
skipped question 77
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
22/2322 of 23
37. The device(s), blanket(s) or other equipment that I used was/were well-suited for use on
battlefield casualties (Only rate items you used and leave rating blank for items not used).
(Note: Actual core temperature measurement is not routinely performed on the battlefield
and is difficult for the provider to judge.)
Strongly
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Ready Heat Blanket 0.0% (0) 3.6% (2) 10.9% (6)36.4%
(20)
49.1%
(27)4.31 55
Blizzard Survival Blanket 2.4% (1) 7.3% (3) 7.3% (3)34.1%
(14)
48.8%
(20)4.20 41
Heat Reflective Shell 1.1% (1) 3.4% (3)13.8%
(12)
49.4%
(43)
32.2%
(28)4.08 87
Wool Blanket 2.7% (3) 6.3% (7)15.2%
(17)
47.3%
(53)
28.6%
(32)3.93 112
Poncho 0.0% (0) 6.7% (2) 20.0% (6)53.3%
(16)20.0% (6) 3.87 30
Poncho Liner 0.0% (0) 3.9% (2)31.4%
(16)
43.1%
(22)
21.6%
(11)3.82 51
Human Remains Pouch 0.0% (0) 3.7% (1) 22.2% (6) 33.3% (9)40.7%
(11)4.11 27
Other (List in comment box) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 27.3% (6) 36.4% (8) 36.4% (8) 4.09 22
Comments: (Durability, patient reaction, ease of use, carriage weight, performance in cold/heat/rain, etc.)
Specify items in your comments. 65
answered question 187
skipped question 77
8/12/2019 NOMLLC TCCC Equipment Evaluation Summary 111207
23/23
38. Is there other battlefield trauma care equipment that you used and would like to
comment on?
Response
Count
81
answered question 81
skipped question 183
39. Is there other battlefield trauma care equipment, medication, or devices that you
needed and did not have?
ResponseCount
72
answered question 72
skipped question 192
40. Additional comments?
Response
Count
53
answered question 53
skipped question 211