The objective of this study was to examine the content validity of commonly used muscle performance tests in military personnel and to investigate the reliability of a proposed test battery. For the content validity investigation, thirty selected tests were those described in the literature and/or commonly used in the Nordic and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries. Nine selected experts rated, on a four-point Likert scale, the relevance of these tests in relation to five different work tasks: lifting, carrying equipment on the body or in the hands, climbing, and digging. Thereafter, a content validity index (CVI) was calculated for each work task. The result showed excellent CVI (≥0.78) for sixteen tests, which comprised of one or more of the military work tasks. Three of the tests; the functional lower-limb loading test (the Ranger test), dead-lift with kettlebells, and back extension, showed excellent content validity for four of the work tasks. For the development of a new muscle strength/endurance test battery, these three tests were further supplemented with two other tests, namely, the chins and side-bridge test. The inter-rater reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC2,1 0.99) for all five tests. The intra-rater reliability was good to high (ICC3,1 0.82–0.96) with an acceptable standard error of mean (SEM), except for the side-bridge test (SEM%>15). Thus, the final suggested test battery for a valid and reliable evaluation of soldiers’ muscle performance comprised the following four tests; the Ranger test, dead-lift with kettlebells, chins, and back extension test. The criterion-related validity of the test battery should be further evaluated for soldiers exposed to varying physical workload.
Musculoskeletal injuries are the most common reason military service members cannot perform their military duties. Not only are they costly and associated with long-term disability, often long after completion of military service, but injuries also adversely affect the military readiness of a nation. This can be seen as a threat to national security and part of the impetus behind many efforts to better understand, predict, and mitigate injury risk in the military. A systematic review of the literature published between 1995 and October 31, 2020 was conducted to identify significant risk factors of musculoskeletal injury in military populations across the world. 74 out of 170 eligible studies addressed comprehensive injuries, providing 994 unique risk factors. 46 of these studies provided data that could be included in a meta-analysis, which was possible for 15 predictor variables. Seven predictors were significant in meta-analysis: female sex(RR=1.46;95CI 1.30,1.64), high body mass index(RR=1.36;95CI 1.21,1.53), functional movement screen pain (RR=1.70;95CI 1.55,1.87) or scores ≤ 14(RR=1.42 95CI 1.29,1.56), prior injury (RR=1.54;95CI 1.32,1.80), slower running performance(RR=1.33;95CI 1.18,1.51), and poorer pushup performance(RR=1.15;95CI 1.04,1.27). Low BMI, height, weight, smoking, physical activity scores, and sit-up and jump performance were not significant risk factors in the meta-analysis. Most studies had a high risk of bias. Lack of raw data and large heterogeneity in definitions of predictors and injury outcomes limited comparison across many studies. Highlights. Female sex, high body mass index, pain with functional movement screen or a score of ≤ 14, prior injury, slower running performance and poorer push-up performance were all significant predictors of musculoskeletal injury. . Low body mass index, height, weight, smoking, physical activity scores, and sit-up and jump performance were not significant predictors of musculoskeletal injury. . Many other predictors were present only in single studies, but large heterogeneity in definitions of both outcomes and predictors limited comparison across studies. . Overall, studies assessing risk factors to predict musculoskeletal injuries in the military were at high risk for bias, especially in regards to statistical approaches.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.