It is unknown if bystanders equipped with point-of-care (POC) instruction are as effective as bystanders with in-person training for bleeding control. Therefore, POC instructional interventions were developed during this study in response to the scalability challenges associated with in-person training to measure the comparative effectiveness and skill retention of POC instructions vs in-person training using a randomized clinical trial design.

Road traffic injuries (RTIs) are the largest contributor to the global trauma burden, which disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). With a lack of robust emergency medical services (EMS), there has been increasing reliance on layperson bystanders to respond to RTIs in LMICs, called lay first responders (LFRs). In prospective studies of LFR activity across three sub-Saharan African countries comprising 2,039 total patient encounters, LFRs most frequently provided hemorrhage control in 61% of patient encounters. Rapid hemorrhage control for compressible extremity hemorrhage by bystander LFRs has the potential to mitigate exsanguination, reducing mortality secondary to RTIs. Rapid hemorrhage control also has applicability to high-income country settings like the United States that sustain high rates of penetrating trauma due to gun violence. Rapid hemorrhage control using tourniquets for compressible extremity hemorrhage in patients not yet in shock is strongly associated with saved lives demonstrated in battlefield studies, decreasing preventable deaths by more than 50%. Bystanders may be trained in-person or point-of-care (POC) instruction may be provided, as exists with automated external defibrillators. However, it is unknown if bystanders equipped with POC instruction are as effective as bystanders with in-person training for tourniquet application. Therefore, the investigators developed POC instructional interventions in response to the scalability challenges associated with in-person training to measure comparative effectiveness and skill retention using a randomized controlled trial design.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Understand spoken and written English

Exclusion Criteria:

• None

Upon reasonable request to the corresponding author

Within 18 months of completion of primary outcome measures

The outcomes assessor only enters the laboratory after the participant has attempted to apply the tourniquet. Therefore, the outcomes assessor is unaware of the instructional intervention that was employed. The outcomes assessor will assess (1) tourniquet placement sufficient distance above the injury defined as at least 2 inches proximal to the amputation, (2) turning on an external diaphragm pump that attempts to force water through tubing in the mannequin extremity bypassing the tourniquet.