The Process of Physical Fitness Standards Development

Constable, Stefan H.; Palmer, Barbara

doi:10.21236/ada495349

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 200 publications

(167 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These investigations may be conducted to assess injury risk in specific populations (12,14,15) or to establish fitness and performance standards (7,17). In military populations, fitness data are also necessary for investigations leading to the evaluation and monitoring of existing programs to decrease the incidence of injuries and increase the combat readiness of soldiers (4,11,18).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of Self-Reported Physical Fitness and Body Mass Index in a Military Population

Martin

Grier

Canham-Chervak

et al. 2016

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many epidemiological studies rely on valid physical fitness data. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the validity of self-reported Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) data and determine whether men and women recall APFT performance differently. U.S. Army soldiers (N = 1,047) completed a survey, including questions on height, weight, and most recent APFT performance. Height, weight, and APFT performance were also obtained from unit records. The mean ± SDs for unit and self-reported push-up repetitions were 63.5 ± 13.1 and 66.3 ± 14.0 for men and 37.7 ± 12.8 and 40.2 ± 12.8 for women, respectively. The mean ± SD for unit- and self-reported sit-up repetitions were 66.3 ± 11.4 and 68.1 ± 12.1 for men and 64.2 ± 13.6 and 66.5 ± 12.9 for women, respectively. The mean ± SD unit- and self-reported 2-mile run times were 15.2 ± 1.8 and 14.9 ± 1.6 minutes for men, and 18.0 ± 2.9 and 17.4 ± 1.9 minutes for women, respectively. Unit- and self-reported body mass indices (BMIs) (calculated by height and weight) were 26.4 ± 3.4 and 26.3 ± 3.6 for men and 24.6 ± 2.8 and 24.2 ± 3.3 for women. Correlations between unit- and self-reported scores for push-ups, sit-ups, 2-mile run, height, weight, and BMI were 0.82, 0.78, 0.85, 0.87, 0.97, and 0.88 for men and 0.86, 0.84, 0.87, 0.78, 0.98, and 0.78 for women, respectively. On average, men and women slightly overreported performance on the APFT and overestimated height, resulting in underestimated BMI. There was no difference in recall ability between men and women (p > 0.05). The very good to excellent correlations (r = 0.78-0.98) between unit- and self-reported scores indicate that self-reported data are valid for capturing physical fitness performance in this population.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of Self-Reported Physical Fitness and Body Mass Index in a Military Population

Martin

Grier

Canham-Chervak

et al. 2016

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Application of these legal requirements or similar requirements in other countries applied to physically demanding occupations especially in which "ineffective job performance can result in loss of life or property" [32] have been the subject of various articles and reports throughout the years (e.g., [33][34][35][36][37][38][39]; Canada [40][41][42]; Australia [43]; Britain [29,44]). In addition to military focused assessments (e.g., [23,29,[45][46][47][48][49]), perhaps even a greater number of studies have addressed other physically demanding occupations such as firefighters [43,50,51] as well as police/correctional/peace officers [32,42,[52][53][54]. Many of the required tasks required by these occupations are similar to those of military tasks.…”

Section: Federal Requirements For Validating Occupational Physical Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlations between Physical Fitness Tests and Performance of Military Tasks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Hauschild¹,

DeGroot²,

Hall³

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To help evaluate the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and ensure a future test is associated with Soldiers' performance of common physical job requirements, the USAPHC applied a Systematic Review (SR) methodology to identify and synthesize published correlations between military task performance and physical fitness tests. Methods: A preliminary step to our SR was to identify key military-relevant tasks and physical fitness components of interest. Starting with the Army's Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills (WTBDs), twelve task categories were identified, including some tasks performed by both military and civilian occupations (e.g., firefighters, police, and athletes). Physical fitness tests were sorted into four physical fitness groups: cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., aerobic fitness), muscle strength, muscle endurance, and flexibility. Tests of muscular strength and muscular endurance were further subcategorized into Upper and Lower Body, Core, or Whole Body regions. Physical tests included the APFT events (2-mile run, sit ups, push-ups) as well as other equipment and non-equipment physical fitness tests (e.g., jump tests, squats, sprints, pull-ups, grip tests, arm lifts, curls, and various extension machine tests). To synthesize the data, a series of meta-analyses provided pooled correlation coefficients for the twelve tasks and eleven physical fitness test groups. Results: Flexibility tests were the least frequently identified, while upper body strength tests were most frequently identified in studies that met our inclusion criteria. Correlations with aerobic tests were fairly well studied, with a few notable gaps (e.g., the Loaded March task). Pooled r coefficients for specific physical tests (e.g., run tests, push-ups, sit-ups, grip tests, and vertical and broad jump tests) were also calculated. Of the physical fitness component groups evaluated, aerobic capacity is most strongly correlated across the greatest number of military tasks (highest r = 0.80, average r for all tasks = 0.53, average r for the top 5 tasks = 0.68, r value range = 0.30-0.80). Of next importance, muscular strength and endurance both have strong correlations with lifting, lowering, stretcher carry and crawl (average for top 5 tasks= r >0.50). Lower body strength and endurance tests (average top 5 task r = 0.63 and r = 0.58) are of similar strength to correlations for top correlations with upper body endurance (average top 5 task r = 0.57). Core endurance, and sit-ups specifically, are weakly correlated with most tasks (average r for all tasks= 0.33; for top 5 tasks r = 0.38). Conclusions: A test of aerobic capacity is fundamental for assessing Soldiers' basic physical capacity to conduct critical tasks, while sit-ups do not appear to be an important test. Muscle strength and endurance are also critical physical components. Since the current APFT does not include a measure of muscle strength or power, consideration should be given to fill this gap in future testing requirements.

show abstract

“…Thus, many schoolhouses and units also routinely evaluate occupational specific events like weighted hikes, obstacle courses, and casualty evacuations for time (13,14). The goal is to identify standardized assessments that translate to operational task performance and provide insights on trainable facets of the human operating system (9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Successful combative operations require more than just physical prowess. Therefore, it is critical to examine high-throughput, minimally demanding performance evaluations that assess individual capacity across a holistic set of domains (including and beyond physical performance) and translate those biometrics to success on tactically relevant, operational tasks (9,43,44).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychophysiology, Cognitive Function, and Musculoskeletal Status Holistically Explain Tactical Performance Readiness and Resilience

Thompson,

Ramadan,

Alexander

et al. 2023

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thompson, AG, Ramadan, JH, Alexander, JS, and Galster, SM. Psychophysiology, cognitive function, and musculoskeletal status holistically explain tactical performance readiness and resilience. J Strength Cond Res 37(12): 2443–2456, 2023—This study aimed to advance the techniques used in quantifying holistic readiness and resilience within military personnel. Tactical performers, instructors, and applied human performance scientists designed a weeklong competition to reflect realistic operational demands, test specific underlying performance constructs, and elucidate how modernized assessments could drive programmatic action. By placing first in their installation's local preliminary competition, 34 active-duty Marines earned the opportunity to compete in a series of 7 intense events for the title of champion. All inferential statistics were set to a p ≤ 0.05 level of significance. Morning heart rate variability identified top from bottom quartile finishers before a single competition event. By day 3, morning countermovement jump force production (normalized reactive strength index-modified) and cognitive psychomotor vigilance were significant indicators of performance resilience and final competition group rank. Heart rate variability also tracked performer readiness across time, identifying within-group and between-group differences among top, bottom, and field. Collectively, these holistic assessments proved significant markers of acute and chronic tactical performance capabilities. In summary, the incorporation of psychophysiological monitoring, cognitive performance testing, and musculoskeletal force plate evaluations could help inform selection and support needs, drive workload or recovery modulation, and provide critical metrics for evaluating training efficacy and operational readiness. Defense organizations should consider routinely incorporating and actioning similar holistic status monitoring strategies in training and operational settings. Moreover, leveraging other tactical competitions may provide key opportunities for advancing the standard of practice through additional scientific investigation.

show abstract

The Process of Physical Fitness Standards Development

Cited by 12 publications

References 200 publications

Validity of Self-Reported Physical Fitness and Body Mass Index in a Military Population

Validity of Self-Reported Physical Fitness and Body Mass Index in a Military Population

Correlations between Physical Fitness Tests and Performance of Military Tasks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Psychophysiology, Cognitive Function, and Musculoskeletal Status Holistically Explain Tactical Performance Readiness and Resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About