Dawes, James

Irving, Shane

Maupin, Daniel

Orr, Rob Marc

Robinson, Jeremy

Schram, Ben

Wills, Thomas

English

Objective: Elite tactical units are frequently deployed in a variety of locations of high level fitness is required by this population. The aim of this critical narrative review was to identify and synthesize key findings of studies that have investigated the fitness profiles of elite tactical units. Methods: A systematic search of three databases was conducted using specific search terms to identify relevant studies. These studies were then assessed against key inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine those to be included in the review. Included studies were critically appraised, and level of evidence determined, while the relevant data were extracted, tabulated, and synthesized. Results: Fourteen identified studies ranged in percentage quality scores from 46% to 66% with a mean of 57.5%, with a moderate interrater agreement as seen in the Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, κ = 0.496. A variety of fitness measures were used in various domains of fitness. The most common measures were in the areas of anthropometric measures, strength, power, and aerobic capacity. However, there was high variety in the tools and procedures to used these areas. Conclusion: Though fitness is a critical part of research and practice, there is no standardized measure or result for this population. Further research needs to be done in the development of a fitness profile using standardized outcome measures and covers the spectrum of the fitness requirements for this population

Bond University Research Portal

Bond UniversityResearch RepositoryFitness Profiles in Elite Tactical Units: A Critical ReviewWills, Thomas ; Maupin, Daniel; Orr, Rob Marc; Schram, Ben; Robinson, Jeremy ; Irving,Shane; Dawes, JamesPublished: 07/04/2018Document Version:Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordLink to publication in Bond University research repository.Recommended citation(APA):Wills, T., Maupin, D., Orr, R. M., Schram, B., Robinson, J., Irving, S., & Dawes, J. (2018). Fitness Profiles in EliteTactical Units: A Critical Review. Poster session presented at 2018 Rocky Mountain American College of SportsMedicine Annual Meeting, Colorado Springs, United States.General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.For more information, or if you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact the Bond University research repositorycoordinator.Download date: 10 May 2019Fitness Profiles in Elite Tactical Units: A Critical Review 1. Bond Institute of Health and Sport, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, 4229   2. Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, 4229   3. Australia Australian Federal Police, Canberra, ACT, Australia, 2600   4. University of Colorado - Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO 80918BackgroundElite tactical units (ETUs) are at the forefront of national security and service. These units require their personnel to routinely perform at the highest level; above and beyond the expectations of civilians and regular tactical members[1]. Fitness profiles are a collection of physiological measures employed for task specific abilities that have been demonstrated to predict quality performance in sport.The physiological measures take into account the physical demands of operational tasks, and have been shown to be useful in the design of programs that address specific weaknesses in the fitness attributes, as related to occupational requirements [2].Fitness profiles may aid in the ETU selection process. For these reasons, this critical literature review will endeavour to identify, critically appraise, and synthesise key findings from the current body of knowledge around fitness profiles within ETU populations.ResultsResultsDiscussion, Conclusion & RecommendationsConclusion• Though fitness is a critical part of research and practice, there is no standardized measure or result for this population. Further research needs to be done in the development of a fitness profile which uses standardized outcome measures and covers the spectrum of the fitness requirements for this population. This is important for the development of selection criteria and return from injury. Key References1. Pryor, R. R., Colburn, D., Crill, M. T., Hostler, D. P., & Suyama, J. (2012). Fitness characteristics of a suburban Special Weapons and Tactics team. J Strength Cond Res, 26(3), 752-757. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318225f1772. Alver, B. A., Sell, K., &amp; Deuster, P. A. (2017). NSCA&#39;S Essentials of Tactical Strength and Conditioning: Human Kinetics, Inc.3. Downs, S. H., & Black, N. (1998). The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 52(6), 377-384.4. Viera, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med, 37(5), 360-363. 5. Kennelly J. Methodological approach to assessing the evidence. In: Handler A, Kennelly J, Peacock N (eds).Reducing Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Reproductive and Perinatal Outcomes: The Evidence from Population-Based Interventions. New York: Springer; 2011, 7–19.Contact: rorr@bond.edu.auMethod• A two-tiered approach was employed to identify and include relevant studies to inform this review. • Search bias was limited via use of broad search terms to capture all studies, while duplication bias was limited during the first step of screening by removing all duplicates. • Two reviewers (DM & TW) independently and separately screened and selected the studies to limit selector bias and ensure an objective selection. • Lastly, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established prior to screening; except for the inclusion criteria ‘each study must contain a fitness measure’, which was implemented partway through screening. The PRISMA chart outlines the search process in its entirety (Figure 1)• All included studies were then critically appraised using a modified Downs and Black checklist [3]. • The level of interrater agreement was then calculated via Cohen’s Kappa coefficient (ϰ), [4].• The Critical Appraisal Scores (CAS) were finalized, by using the average of the two final scores. The studies were then graded using qualitative ratings proposed by Kennelly [5].• The Kennelly system converts to a percentage-based score to enable comparable grading of the modified Downs and Black, with < 45.4% signifying ‘poor’ methodological quality, between 45.4% and 61.0% showing ‘fair’ methodological quality, and >61.0% demonstrating ‘good’ methodological quality. Article Title SI AM STR PWR END FLEX AC AGI SPD D&B KPryor et al., 2012          54% FairDhahbi et al., 2015          64% GoodSolberg et al., 2015          63% GoodMales et al., 1999          46% FairSporis et al., 2012          66% GoodNindl et al., 2007          52% FairR. Orr et al., 2015          57% FairSimpson et al., 2017          54% FairHunt et al., 2013          63% GoodDawes et al., 2014          57% FairSperlich et al., 2011          52% FairDhahbi et al., 2016          55% FairMuza et al., 1987          54% FairSharp et al., 2008          68% GoodSI= Subjective Info, AM= Anthroprometric Measures, STR= Strength, PWR= Power, END= Endurance, FLEX= Flexibility, AC= Aerobic Capacity, AGI= Agility, SPD= Speed, D&B= Downs and Black Score, K= Kennelly Score• A total of 11 studies focused on various military special force units, whilst 3 studies specifically studied Special Weapons and Tactics police.• Methodological quality was fair quality overall (57.5%±6.3%: range 46%- 68%). (See Table 1.)• The most common measures examined were anthropometric and aerobic capacity, in 79% and 71% of studies, respectively.• The least common measures were agility and speed, recorded in only 14% and 21% of studies, respectively.• Studies were consistently given lower scores in the area of internal validity. None were randomised-control studies and as such no blinding was implemented. • Due to the high variance in the outcome scores and measurement tests, the ability to effectively compare across studies was limited. • Future fitness profiles research would benefit from standardized outcome measures as well as agreed standised measurements   Records identified through database searching (n =  3886) Screening Included Eligibility Identification Additional records identified through expert in the field  (n = 3) Records after duplicates removed (n = 3062) Records screened (n =  3062) Records excluded (must contain tactical and adults) (n = 1396) Full-text articles assessed for eligibility (n =  1666 ) Full-text articles excluded (n = 1652)  Reasons: Health concerns (n=1090) Health Intervention (n=288) Non elite (n= 267) Systematic Review (n=5) Graphic representation of data (n=1)  Studies included in qualitative synthesis (n = 14) Thomas Wills1, Danny Maupin1, Robin Orr2, Ben Schram2, Jeremy Robinson3, Shane Irving3, Jay Dawes4,Table 1. Results of Critical ReviewFigure 1: PRISMA Flow Chart showing the review and screening process of all articles2018 RMACSM Annual MeetingApril 6-7, 2018

Fitness Profiles in Elite Tactical Units: A Critical Review

https://pure.bond.edu.au/ws/files/26292970/Poster_Fitness_Profiles_in_Elite_Tactical_Units.pdf

Fitness Profiles in Elite Tactical Units: A Critical Review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Bond University Research Portal