A Field Investigation Exploring the Effect of Load and Load Distribution on Performance during Team-Based Military Tasks
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Heavy load carriage has negative health and performance implications for military personnel, such as links to musculoskeletal injuries and longer completion times of military tasks. There is a need to understand performance-related factors as they interact with equipment in a simulated military task, completed in teams and in an outdoor environment. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of load condition on the performance of a simulated high-intensity military task completed in an outdoor environment in a 2-person team. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 14 male participants (average ± standard deviation 27.7 ± 7.5 years, 180.2 ± 7.1 cm, and 79.2 ± 7.4 kg) were recruited from the Canadian Army reserve force population. In pairs, participants completed eight simulated bounding rush tasks over 30 m in an outdoor field environment while wearing four randomized equipment conditions, including, (i) Slick (5 kg); (ii) Medium (23 kg); (iii) Heavy Pockets (37 kg), Medium with additional load concentrated anterior and posteriorly close to the torso; and (iv) Heavy Backpack (37 kg), Medium with additional load distributed posteriorly in a day pack. Each participant began one of the bounding rush trials (e.g., moved first) for each equipment condition (two trials per condition) and self-selected the distance travelled in each individual bound and speed during each task. Inertial measurement units (Movella, Henderson, NV, United States) captured the movements of both participants continuously, and surveys assessed the acceptability of aspects of the equipment conditions and performance of each task. RESULTS: There was a main effect of equipment condition on the total team completion time of the bounding rush task (P = .0006) and the individual prone-to-run transition (P = .0343), where the Heavy Pocket and Heavy Backpack conditions took significantly longer to complete compared to the Slick condition. Subjective ratings of speed performance demonstrated a significant difference between equipment conditions (P = .0008), where significant differences were detected between the Slick, Medium, and Heavy Backpack conditions, while there was no significant difference between the Heavy Pockets, Medium, and Heavy Backpack conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Equivalent weight carried in a posterior location (e.g., a backpack) compared to closer to the midline of the body does not improve subjective, survey-based perceived ratings of overall performance, agility speed, or mobility during the tasks evaluated in the current investigation. Future investigations examining team dynamics would improve external validity by including the full team in the scenario.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».