Effects of Swim Strokes in Labor-wear With and Without a Personal Flotation Device

We determined how three different swim strokes were affected by standard labor-wear with and without use of a personal flotation device (PFD). The two main research questions included (1) what effects would standard labor-wear have on the American crawl, elementary back stroke and breast stroke with and without a PFD for 11.4 m (12.5 yds).  The sub questions included: (2) Will the addition of the PFD improve swim times? We addressed these questions with six hypotheses. Statistical analysis showed statistically significant P-values for the American crawl (no PFD 23.29 sec, PFD 18.29 sec, P = 0.0010) and back stroke (no PFD 36.96 sec, PFD 31.00 sec, P = 0.0223); the strokes showed improved swim times with the PFD. We detected no statistical evidence (P = 0.2086) for the mean swim time (22.61 sec) for the breast stroke with PFD and the mean swim time (23.00 sec) for breast stroke without a PFD. Swim time between swimmers with and without a PFD differed. The mean swim time for all swimmers with a PFD (24.17sec) was faster than the mean swim time for all swimmers without a PFD (27.75 sec, P = 0.0153). The mean swim time for swimmers using the elementary back stroke (33.98 sec) was slower than the mean swim time for swimmers using the crawl stroke (21.10 sec, P < 0.0001) and the mean swim time for swimmers using the breast stroke (22.81 sec).  We detected no difference between the mean swim time for swimmers using the crawl stroke and the mean swim time for swimmers using the breast stroke. We also detected no evidence (P = 0.164) of a stroke X flotation interaction effect

Key questions in marine mammal bioenergetics

This work was funded by the Marine Mammal Commission (MMC19-173). The Office of Naval Research funded the bioenergetic workshop (N000142012392) that provided support for this work.Bioenergetic approaches are increasingly used to understand how marine mammal populations could be affected by a changing and disturbed aquatic environment. There remain considerable gaps in our knowledge of marine mammal bioenergetics, which hinder the application of bioenergetic studies to inform policy decisions. We conducted a priority-setting exercise to identify high-priority unanswered questions in marine mammal bioenergetics, with an emphasis on questions relevant to conservation and management. Electronic communication and a virtual workshop were used to solicit and collate potential research questions from the marine mammal bioenergetic community. From a final list of 39 questions, 11 were identified as ‘key’ questions because they received votes from at least 50% of survey participants. Key questions included those related to energy intake (prey landscapes, exposure to human activities) and expenditure (field metabolic rate, exposure to human activities, lactation, time-activity budgets), energy allocation priorities, metrics of body condition and relationships with survival and reproductive success and extrapolation of data from one species to another. Existing tools to address key questions include labelled water, animal-borne sensors, mark-resight data from long-term research programs, environmental DNA and unmanned vehicles. Further validation of existing approaches and development of new methodologies are needed to comprehensively address some key questions, particularly for cetaceans. The identification of these key questions can provide a guiding framework to set research priorities, which ultimately may yield more accurate information to inform policies and better conserve marine mammal populations.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

A Case Study of Muscular Strength, Endurance, and Power Responses to a 6-Week High Intensity Training Program

We evaluated the muscular strength, endurance, and power responses of 12 college students, ranging in age from 19-40 years, who participated in a 6-wk high-intensity training program commonly used to improve muscular endurance. Muscular strength was measured by a one repetition maximum (1RM) bench press test and a 1RM Hammer bench press test; muscular endurance was measured by administering a 70-percent 1RM test to failure on the Hammer bench press; and upper body power was measured by adminstering a medicine ball throw test. We observed a 4.8-percent improvement of 2.7 kg on the bench press, a 14.6-percent improvement of 10.5 kg on the Hammer bench press, a 45.5-percent improvement with an average increase of five repetitions on the submaximal test to failure and an average improvement of ~ 20 percent, 60 cm, for the medicine ball throw. Foe our subjects, a commonly used high-intensity training muscular endurance program resulted in improved performance on tests measuring muscular strength, endurance, and power, and resulted in zero reported injuries during training or assessment procedures

Development of an item bank for measuring prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputation: The Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M)

Achieving mobility with a prosthesis is a common post-amputation rehabilitation goal and primary outcome in prosthetic research studies. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to measure prosthetic mobility have practical and psychometric limitations that inhibit their use in clinical care and research.To develop a brief, clinically meaningful, and psychometrically robust PROM to measure prosthetic mobility.A cross-sectional study was conducted to administer previously developed candidate items to a national sample of lower limb prosthesis users. Items were calibrated to an item response theory model and two fixed-length short forms were created. Instruments were assessed for readability, effective range of measurement, agreement with the full item bank, ceiling and floor effects, convergent validity, and known groups validity.Participants were recruited using flyers posted in hospitals and prosthetics clinics across the United States, magazine advertisements, notices posted to consumer websites, and direct mailings.Adult prosthesis users (N = 1091) with unilateral lower limb amputation due to traumatic or dysvascular causes.Not applicable.Candidate items (N = 105) were administered along with the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Brief Profile, Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire - Mobility Subscale, and Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, and questions created to characterize respondents.A bank of 44 calibrated self-report items, termed the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), was produced. Clinical and statistical criteria were used to select items for 7- and 12-item short forms. PLUS-M instruments had an 8th grade reading level, measured with precision across a wide range of respondents, exhibited little-to-no ceiling or floor effects, correlated expectedly with scores from existing PROMs, and differentiated between groups of respondents expected to have different levels of mobility.The PLUS-M appears to be well suited to measuring prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputation. PLUS-M instruments are recommended for use in clinical and research settings