Talk:Suspension trauma

Treatment section may be innacurate
The treatment section says to put the patient in a W position. However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_death says that standard first aid procedures should be followed. The counter-claim is backed up by two sources: 1) https://emj.bmj.com/content/28/4/265 2) https://emj.bmj.com/content/26/12/896

associated reddit discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/TechRescue/comments/dn9w27/what_is_the_correct_position_to_use_for_a_patient/

I'm not a doctor so I don't feel comfortable saying for sure which side is correct. Can someone with medical experience review this please?

Calsem (talk) 05:50, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Medical Suspension Shock
Another less well documented class of Suspension trauma is healthcare patients, held in various forms of physical restraint or support for safety or theraputic purposes. These include theraputic baths and hospital beds (for complex metabolic-respiratory-hemodynamic issues), safety seats (to prevent fall injury from fainting during phlebotomy, dental, or other concious surgical procedures), and support and suspension frames, slings, and swings (for orthooedic, postural, movement, and gate therapy). The patients are at increased risk of, and susceptibility to these same morbid processes even while sitting or nearly horizontal. Consistent with the metabolic phenomena described for the healthy above, patients are typically injured without 'trauma' when care providers fail to continuously monitor, or correctly respond to patients who faint (spontaneous or stress triggered) and they very quickly succum, due to their incipient healt status.

Although the typicalal MSS injury is dismissed as 'heart attack', the field of phlebotomy is starting to recognize the phenomenon in patients who faint in phlebotomy the chair, and recommending that the patinet be released and carefully conducted to the floor, enabling a spontaneous and 'uneventful recovery.' ((Phlebotomy Today Feb. 2012)) --Wikidity (talk) 03:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Source review
I note that someone has written that one source "is probably the most authoratative source of information". Regardless of whether this may or may not be true, this needs to be proven. Can someone review the sources? We also have to consider the problem of giving undue weight to any one source, which is compounded by the lack of proper citing in the article.--Drat (Talk) 00:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There is a decent list of references at, with the comment:"We often receive enquiries asking how 'official' the research into suspension trauma is - how many medical studies, who did them, why and when. The usual response is that the literature is extensive, but actually getting hold of a copy is difficult - many publications were closed-issue and are not on the general electronic databases." This seems to be true -- a lot of the research is in technical reports from military aerospace medicine, or in internal journals of various cave-rescue and mountain rescue organizations, and can be hard to access, and may be difficult to know how trustworthy or up-to-date it is lev 20:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

This entry is in desperate need of grammar correction.
There are several sentences and paragraphs where a submitter has added text that changes the (grammatical) person (and verb tense).

The entire entry should be in third person; all second person ("If you faint and remain vertical you will die due to your brain not receiving the oxygen it required,") and first person plural ("In normal life this problem does not occur because when we walk our veins naturally move blood back out of our legs...,") should be reworded.

128.83.68.58 20:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I have source here that looks appropriate but I'd like someone to double-check it: http://ohsonline.com/Articles/2003/03/Will-Your-Safety-Harness-Kill-You.aspx

I tried to put it in the article but failed on my first attempt so if nobody comes along soon to work it in properly I will try to (re)learn how to do it. jam (talk) 03:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

simple faint?
According to this source http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/harness.htm is "trauma" inappropriate term (based on http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr708.pdf) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.108.102.146 (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Dead link
Reference 2 is a link ( http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/harness.htm ) which does not go to the correct article anymore. I didn't just remove it because it seems to be the most important reference on treatment. Maybe someone can fix this? A possible additional reference is this https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2658225/ Perencake (talk) 15:58, 26 October 2016 (UTC)