Lauren Keaney, Andrew Kilding, Graham Fordy, Helen Kilding
{"title":"Why are we doing this Staff? Justification and implications of aerobic fitness testing in the military.","authors":"Lauren Keaney, Andrew Kilding, Graham Fordy, Helen Kilding","doi":"10.3233/WOR-240137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Physical fitness is a key tenet of military organisations worldwide. Specifically, many consider aerobic fitness (AF) an essential physical attribute for ensuring optimal military performance and readiness. However, the intricate relationship between AF and various facets of military job performance necessitates comprehensive review to ascertain the appropriateness and effectiveness of its assessment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This narrative review aims to describe the relationship between AF and factors influencing individual military performance and readiness, and explores the implications of the enforcement of in-service, generic AF test standards in military populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Databases (PubMed and Google Scholar) were searched for all relevant published peer-reviewed literature as at August 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Inconsistent associations were found between AF and outcomes influencing individual military performance (physical capabilities, cognitive capabilities, presenteeism and productivity, resilience, and technical/tactical capabilities) and readiness (mental health and wellbeing and physical health). Consequently, the level of AF needed for acceptable or optimal military performance remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AF is a cornerstone of health and performance, yet linking generic AF test standards to job performance is complex, with multiple factors interacting to influence outcomes. From existing literatures, there does not appear to be a specific level of AF at, and/or above, which acceptable military performance is achieved. As such, the enforcement of and emphasis on in-service, pass/fail, generic AF test standards in military populations is questionable and requires thoughtful re-evaluation. Role/task-specific AF should be assessed through evidence-based PES and the use of generic AF tests limited to the monitoring and benchmarking of health-related fitness.</p>","PeriodicalId":51373,"journal":{"name":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-240137","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Physical fitness is a key tenet of military organisations worldwide. Specifically, many consider aerobic fitness (AF) an essential physical attribute for ensuring optimal military performance and readiness. However, the intricate relationship between AF and various facets of military job performance necessitates comprehensive review to ascertain the appropriateness and effectiveness of its assessment.
Objective: This narrative review aims to describe the relationship between AF and factors influencing individual military performance and readiness, and explores the implications of the enforcement of in-service, generic AF test standards in military populations.
Methods: Databases (PubMed and Google Scholar) were searched for all relevant published peer-reviewed literature as at August 2023.
Results: Inconsistent associations were found between AF and outcomes influencing individual military performance (physical capabilities, cognitive capabilities, presenteeism and productivity, resilience, and technical/tactical capabilities) and readiness (mental health and wellbeing and physical health). Consequently, the level of AF needed for acceptable or optimal military performance remains uncertain.
Conclusions: AF is a cornerstone of health and performance, yet linking generic AF test standards to job performance is complex, with multiple factors interacting to influence outcomes. From existing literatures, there does not appear to be a specific level of AF at, and/or above, which acceptable military performance is achieved. As such, the enforcement of and emphasis on in-service, pass/fail, generic AF test standards in military populations is questionable and requires thoughtful re-evaluation. Role/task-specific AF should be assessed through evidence-based PES and the use of generic AF tests limited to the monitoring and benchmarking of health-related fitness.
背景:体能是全球军事组织的一项重要原则。特别是,许多人认为有氧体能(AF)是确保最佳军事表现和战备状态的基本身体素质。然而,有氧体适能与军事工作表现的各个方面之间存在着错综复杂的关系,因此有必要对其进行全面审查,以确定其评估的适当性和有效性:本叙述性综述旨在描述 AF 与影响个人军事表现和战备状态的因素之间的关系,并探讨在军事人群中执行现役通用 AF 测试标准的意义:在数据库(PubMed 和 Google Scholar)中搜索了截至 2023 年 8 月所有已发表的相关同行评审文献:结果:AF 与影响个人军事表现(体能、认知能力、出勤率和生产率、应变能力和技术/战术能力)和战备(心理健康和身体健康)的结果之间存在不一致的关联。因此,可接受或最佳军事表现所需的抗缺氧水平仍不确定:健康水平是健康和绩效的基石,但将一般健康水平测试标准与工作绩效联系起来却很复杂,多种因素相互作用,影响结果。从现有文献来看,似乎并不存在一个具体的适应能力水平,达到和/或超过这一水平就能取得可接受的军事表现。因此,在军人群体中执行和强调在职、及格/不及格、通用 AF 测试标准是有问题的,需要深思熟虑后重新评估。针对特定角色/任务的自动适应能力应通过循证 PES 进行评估,而通用自动适应能力测试的使用应仅限于与健康相关的体能监测和基准设定。
期刊介绍:
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal''s subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.