Mast trauma pants

[ERDoc]

I was a CFR (certified first responder) in NYS in 1992 and MAST were not part of our level of care. Another question in this 2 decade old witch hunt is whether the MAST was inflated or not. From the sounds of it, the person was going to die regardless. To the OP, it's never a wise idea to come on a forum and start insulting members or the profession in which they are employed. You are not likely to get much help.

[Lone Star]

In 1995-97, Oakland, Wayne, Macomb and Genesee Counties required that MAST/PASG were 'required equipment'. In all my time in the field, I've never had an occasion where they were even placed on the patient; let alone inflated.

The rumor at the time was that if the Docs in metro Detroit had a patient brought in with MAST/PASG inflated, they would 'deflate them' by stabbing/cutting them, thus rendering them useless.

One of the joys of working in a large metro area like Detroit, we usually had several different 'destination options' depending on what we had and where we were, thereby making the <10 minute transport consideration a good reason not to even use them...

To the OP, it's never a wise idea to come on a forum and start insulting members or the profession in which they are employed. You are not likely to get much help.

Yeah, it's never a good idea to slap the dog for snoring; unless of course you're willing to go throughout life with one less hand...

[Dustdevil]

back when this event took place Military anti shock trousers were common place in trauma protocols almost everywhere.

Today there are few circumstances that allow them to be used. Most state equipment lists don't even require them to be a part of the required equipment list.

Did the application of MAST cause the death? Hell No ! the person who stuck the knife in his chest caused the death.

END of discussion.

^ This. I was practising then, although not in NY. MAST were still common frontline intervention at the time, however the debate had already begun over they were really a good idea or not. Consequently, many systems had already removed them from penetrating trauma protocols. New York tends to lag far behind the current literature, so what their specific protocol was at the time would have to be researched through the NY dept of health, and good luck with that.

The warnings about field removal were written before we realised that MAST were killing people, so that would not apply at a time when they were contraindicated. Think about it. Any time you can undo something that was wrong in the first place, that is a good thing, right. And if the EMT demanded their immediate removal, regardless of what the protocols of the day said, we now know that he was correct, medically speaking.

That said, with today's knowledge, and regardless of what the protocols of the day said, we now also know that the first responders were medically wrong to inflate those trousers. However, in NY, unlike many states, responders do not have the liberty of contradicting their protocols. They have to cook strictly by the book, even if the book is out of date. So, procedurally, they were probably in the right. Again, you won't know until you have copies of the official protocols from that day in your hands.

You may indeed come to show that one or more responders violated their protocols on that day. And you may indeed come to show that one or more of them did something that was medically incorrect by present or past standards. However, I can assure you that you will not find either possibility to have played a role in this man's death. The only factor that EMT's may have lent to his demise would be if they delayed his transportation significantly. But again, the protocols of the day would define the time parameters. Fifteen minutes on scene before transportation was the generally accepted standard of the time. Any longer would have to be justified by complications, such as a mechanical failure or difficulty removing the victim from the scene.

Of course, if it is anywhere documented that the victim lost his pulse or breathing, or that CPR was initiated before his arrival at the hospital, then forget about all of this. That would mean he was already dead. And the inability to resurrect the dead does not by any convoluted stretch of the imagination equal a contribution to the death. If you have not yet been successful articulating the self-defence justification, then there is zero chance that the medical angle will help you out. You simply will not find a competent medical expert today to testify that MAST pants are or were a good intervention for penetrating chest trauma.

I never understand why some here get all paranoid about questions like these. I could not care less why our new friend wants to know. Accurate information and discussion is good for us all. Who cares if it is someone involved in litigation? Nothing from an open forum like this is going to be taken as qualified expert testimony in any court. There is no harm in an academic discussion to help him decide if this is something worth even pursuing an expert for. And I believe we are all in agreement that it is not.