09/02/2025
Our post last week was referencing a new SHIELD course on Pelvic Binders. We wanted to add some clarity and context.
Original Post: The Dark Horse of Black Boxes - high-mortality injuries—often overlooked until it’s too late. CAPCE-accredited, scenario-driven, and built for the tactical medic. Register to take this week’s eLearning to better keep your patients (and their hips) together when it matters most.
Update: While we are not proposing that improvised pelvic binders are the answer, we feel that the capability to improvise in extremis is a necessary trait of a medic in an operational setting. The current controversy surrounding pelvic binders is the reason we wanted to create this course.
The course outlines:
-Anatomy and Physiology related to pelvic injuries
-Recognition of pelvic fractures
-What a pelvic binder is intended to do
-What the literature says (and doesn’t say)
-Considerations in application of pelvic binders
The need to add this context was brought to our attention, and we felt that it was correct to do so.
We would like to hear your thoughts on the current state of pelvic injuries and binders? This seems to be a topic that has ebbed and flowed with varying levels of evidence. It has been pretty well clarified that a binder (as it is named) is not functioning in a role as a hemorrhage control device but rather as a means of adding stability and hopefully relieving some discomfort. In the operational arena, we feel it is often clustered with the creation of an improvised junctional device leading to the confusion. However, in the absence of a mechanism to target pressure to an inguinal site (in this case) it does not provide true hemorrhage control. What is your experience? What are your current guidelines on pelvic binders?
