Is this the correct location for the best information on this? The link takes you to a powerpoint presentation.
www.cs.amedd.army.mil/clsp/slides/RLS%20TCCC.ppt
There is a lot of confusion about what TCCC is and is not. The thing about TCCC is that it doesn’t really have much application to the average CCW/shooter. It’s interesting if its for your own edification, but it won’t really help you prepare unless you’ve got a system in place supporting you. I presume your local PD/ EMS is that system.
TCCC is less a series of techniques and more about a mindset of evacuating tactical trauma. The techniques involved aren’t anything particularly radical or high-speed, it’s just a reassessment of how the military processes casualties for evacuation/care.
Essentially it’s a “philosophy” of care beginning with aggressive self/buddy aid (as opposed to the Corpsman/Medic who would now be considered a second tier) and then moving the casualty up the chain of evacuation to more definitive care (ending at Walter Reed etc.). The techniques remain essentially the same…ABCs etc.
My recommendation for the overwhelming majority of shooters would be to focus on BLS, First Responder/EMT or other training that involves specific skills. You should be thinking about evacuation, but TCCC is really only relevant to an institution like the military or EMS.
Definitely more interested from an educational standpoint than necessarily application. I agree that this may be one of those things with no mil:civ carryover.
Given that I’d say it’s accurate information about TCCC in the mil from what I gleaned in 5 minutes scanning the thumbnails. I think I’ve actually seen that exact Powerpoint before today.
TCCC is significantly different in three ways 1) primary survey and initial treatment (tx) is CAB vs ABC aka treat the gross bleed 1st 2) modality of tx differs from civilian protocols … do note you probably can’t get the different clotting agents, needles, etc. anyway. 3) the tiering of care, and definitive care.
or… SCAB vs ABC Scene, Circulation (gross bleed), Airway, Breathing I think it’s a good start… I have seen a bleedout in 10-15 seconds.
No doubt medical types wrote that PPT… treatment under effective fire… haha the best tx is dead bad guys. Effective fire is hot metal wrecking soft tissue, I wouldn’t recommend tx of anything in this circumstance… but i imagine this vein of thought could devolve into semantics quickly.
Quality medical training, hands on live tissue, etc. is very expensive. Be prepared for in excess of a grand a day per student for a module with solid instructors and infrastucture.
Like Gutshot John said, Tc3 is a mindset. If you are under fire, your first priority to the wounded is to return fire and suppress or eliminate the immediate threat. After all, a dead medic or combat lifesaver is of no use to a casualty.
Interesting PPP, but you can sum it all up with this:
#1 preventable killer is bleeding out (hemorrhaging)
#2 preventable killer is sucking chest woulds (tension pneumothorax)
That agrees with that I had learned before deploying to Iraq.
Funny thing about that is that as an infantryman I had better training on how to treat casualties than I did on how to effectively employ my main weapon system, the m4…But that’s a whole 'nother post altogether.
Maybe this should be required viewing for our nations teachers.
Your looking for this:
Whoa…that’s crazy expensive. $5-600/day???
You could take a whole EMT-P class for the same money ($2K) or less and get more/better training. Volunteer as a paramedic and someone else might even pay your tuition while you get some good experience too while serving your community.
Even GORGRP’s “Gunfight Medicine” class worked out to less than $300/day depending on participation.
Keep looking.
I didn’t know money was an issue, 
but it’s one of the courses based on TCCC.
There are a number of organizations that provide tactical medical training, deploymentmedicine.com happens to be an outstanding one, along with tacticalelement.com; also many state SWAT organizations offer tactical medical training to its members. Google tactical medical training for your state and you will find quite a few!
If your looking for combat or trauma medicine training, and have a finite time $$ alotment… Paramedic is a waste of time. A Paramedic works within narrow Standing Orders of the city/county… and a 10-20 minute ride to a trauma center. Utilizing outdated protocols as compared to the latest military medicine. As a life experience… it will teach you alot…
If you really want to gain competance… it cost, and live tissue is necessary. You get what you pay for.
When I was working as a paramedic, after having been an military medic I was surprised to find the limits of the scope of practice. Sutures, needle decompression, chest tubes, antibiotics for gross battle wounds, etc… Nope.
I will qualify this by saying I was an 18D medic & NREMT Paramedic (CA & TX)
Waste of time? I think you’re overstating your case a bit. It may not be suitable for everyone, but it’s hardly a waste of time/money, especially when you get people charging $2k for a 3-4 day class. That’s a completely waste of time money. It may teach you some skills, but if you don’t get to practice those…well they are perishable skills. That said suggesting a paramedic class was only by comparison to the overpriced class above not as an end-all be-all solution.
Military medics have a broader scope of practice, but they don’t always get the field experience (current 18Ds I know acknowledge this) that paramedics get. The venous cutdown training is great, but not applicable to 99% of those here. Similarly I’ve done extrications/transports that lasted hours as a civilian so I’m not sure your 10-20 minute window is universally true. True in your case perhaps, but not true for everyone.
Though I don’t know what happens in CA/TX, here the protocols are not developed by the county/city, they’re developed by EMS Physicians who then give command to their paramedics. My scope of practice as a civilian paramedic was not that much narrower than as a Corpsman, by virtue of the proximity. Similarly my scope of practice exceeded RNs/BSNs who weren’t even allowed to intubate patients.
As you said having hands-on with an actual patient is far more worthwhile than getting a bunch of high-speed skills you may get to apply 2-4x a year as opposed to 2-4x a week. PHTLS in itself will add significantly to your tactical knowledge unless you’re already a high-speed/low-drag 18D type.
Well it appears I’ve butt hurt a Paramedic… figure the odds. Do note I caveated with “finite time & $$ allotment”.
For the time spent away from ones primary job earning $$, the time spent learning outdated IMO modalities of treatment, and the cost associated with course fees… not to mention travel or lodging requirements… I think Paramedic is a waste. It is a course/cert, and Standing Orders of treatments, designed to carry one through a highly litigous work place… not to prepare one for the rapid assessment and treatments required in armed conflict.
There are shorter, more direct, cost effective ways of getting relevant training suitable for austere enviornments & conflict. As all thing in life… you get what you pay for.
I would prefer to have a trained assaulter (not even a SOF medic) with one to two weeks of high level med skills training scoop my ass off bullet ridden streets than a Paramedic. How many live amputations, broken spines, gunshot wounds to assorted areas, needle decompression, burned airways, smashed airways & cricks ON LIVE TISSUE have Paramedics done in their training… NONE vs several for members of highly trained units.
If your not a Corpsman ( I was a Paramedic) I wouldn’t compare your “scope of practice”… really are you serious… you did notice 1) there is a war going on they get a little work 2) military medicine isn’t stagnated by the lawsuit driven civilian protocols 3) are you even aware of the scope a Corpsman has v Fleet Marine Force (FMF) Corpsman, vs A Spec Ops Independent Duty Corpsman (IDC) vs a Submarine IDC vs… get the drift
Wow…I guess I butt-hurt an 18D…what are the odds? Funny how that cuts both ways? You made it personal when it really didn’t have to be. Your statement doesn’t really add to your credibility only the smug level. I’m quite aware of the differences between the scopes of practice. I’ve been both (yes with the FMF, yes in remote settings). I’m proud of being both. You made it about civilian v. military. Most here are civilians so what do you think is more relevant here? So please, spare us the bluster.
First, I’m quite aware there is a war on, but 18Ds invariably are in support of their team not in daily contact with patient-care especially traumatic patient care. Big difference. Similarly the individual I know at GORGRP who did their hiring/training didn’t look for guys with 18D certification, he looked for guys with REAL operational medical experience though some were indeed 18D, others aren’t. This means daily experience in patient care. Even if you have that, what skills exactly are you using on a daily basis that a corpsman/paramedic isn’t? Seriously dude, you and I both know that the life of an 18D isn’t filled with cool, extravagant healthcare techniques on a daily basis. Similarly as a civilian paramedic I’ve done needle decompression, needle crikes, emergency crikes, assisted with chest tubes by radio command, handled traumatic amputations, more than a few (drastic understatement) spinal cord injuries including an internal decapitation etc…etc…etc. So what? You’d still prefer someone who’s had the training instead of someone with that experience? I guess that makes sense. :rolleyes:
Second, please tell me what high-speed skills you use regularly as an 18D that Corpsman/Paramedics don’t? I’m guessing that most of the time you’re not doing much more than either of the latter, let alone an EMT-B. You’re doing venous cutdowns…how often exactly? Weekly? How often are you doing hour long plus transports? I’ve done quite a few, in the military and out.
Third, I’ve seen lots of guys with lots of high-speed training come out of the military and when faced with civilian car accidents, pediatric trauma, GSW trauma who shit the bed. Training is definitely not the same as experience and experience treating actual patients is far more valuable than all the high-speed training in the world that you may or may not actually get to do. If you prefer training to experience, well that’s your preference, I disagree.
Fourth (and maybe most importantly) if you had read my original post you would have seen that I added as many caveats as you did. I never argued that an EMT-P was the most cost-effective method of training…but if a civilian is going to spend $2K on a 3 day TCCC class (that’s not going to be relevant to 99% of the people here) well I’m sure you can figure the rest out. If you’re going to spend that kind of money, you can get lots of good training/experience in an EMT-P program. If not, than this conversation becomes academic.
Check your ego at the door brother. This isn’t about you or me this is about what’s going to be effective for those here that are neither 18D, paramedics nor corpsman. Please try and read everything I wrote, it might avoid some of the confusion above.
oops!!
Gutshot John, becareful in your comments. Dano5326 is a SME on this forum and there are VERY few of them so take that as clue that they have been there and done that.
Dano, while I agree with the point you are attempting to make I think you are overgeneralizing the pre-hospital community. Just as there are varying KSA’s amongst the military personnel assigned to medical duties, very few paramedics among different agencies will have the same experience, training, equipment, capabilities and scope of practice. You might be surprised to learn that as a civilian only paramedic I have been trained on each of the skills/procedures you list above, and depending on the medical director many systems have these in their protocols. While I think TCCC training is the way to go if you primarily expect to see traumatic injuries, comparing it to the broad spectrum medical training and experience with actual patients that you gain through paramedic training probably doesn’t do justice to either program.
Perhaps you should take it up with him. Both before and after he offered his patronizing tone, I continued to refrain from personal commentary, something the “SME” failed to do. All I had said was he was “overstating” his case. He made it personal. When I did respond, I used the EXACT same language he used, mostly as a way of making a point. If my words were out of line, his definitely were. Moreover as an SME, his observations about scope of practice of civilian paramedics were flat incorrect. He did not qualify any of his comments by saying “in my community” etc. He made a blanket generalization about something of which he had no direct knowledge which is something I thought this forum frowned upon.
As for being an “SME” I know a thing or two about both military medicine and civilian EMS, in fact I have nearly 20 years experience combined. If you think my comments were incorrect, I’d be happy to answer specific questions, but being careful about one’s comments should apply as much to the SME as others, in fact probably more so.
I give as much respect as I am given.
Also I would argue Gutshot that your comparison is like saying that a Larry Vickers class is as expensive as some community college peace officer programs. A police academy will teach you when and how to safely employ deadly force within the confines of the LEO’s responsibility, Larry Vickers will teach you how to best employ deadly force with a sidearm. Yes a police academy will teach you to shoot a pistol but you will be more proficient after the Vickers class. Paramedic school will teach you the pathophysiology behind a tension pneumothorax and tell you that that you should prevent it or fix it. A good TCCC class will teach you the best ways to fix a tension pneumothorax. Different philosophies, methods, and focus’.
BTW - Gutshot and Dano, for what its worth I respect both of your opinions but I think you both need to take a step back and look at how you are presenting your thoughts. I think both of you took inappropriate approaches to presenting your opinions and as a result you got very little useful info out to anyone else. We are all trying to share our thoughts, opinions, knowledge and experience for the benefit of ourselves and the other members of the forum. Thank you both for your service and dedication.