C Heard1, M Willcox2, M Falvo3,4, M Blatt5, D Helmer3,4. 1. Protac. 2. US Army Medical Department. 3. Department of Veterans Affairs. 4. War Related Illness and Injury Study Center. 5. Hackensack University Medical Center.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Performing well in combat requires military service members to be in peak physical shape. Although each branch of the United States military has fitness guidelines and assessments, there are no exact prescriptions for physical training programs. The absence of a standardised approach may lead to suboptimal physical performance and increased risk of musculoskeletal injury. To address this gap, we evaluated the feasibility of a pilot combat conditioning program based on linear periodisation. METHODS: Twenty-nine garrisoned US Marine Corps service members (25 men, 4 women; 23.5±4.4 years) enrolled in our 11-week conditioning program that was supervised by a strength and conditioning professional. Military-specific (physical/combat fitness tests) and general (treadmill-based maximal exercise test) assessments were performed at baseline and 11 weeks. Training and injury logs were maintained throughout the duration of the program. RESULTS: Approximately 80% (23/29) of service members completed the entire program. Cardiorespiratory fitness (Peak VO2; +8.10±10.9%; p=0.011), upper-body strength (pull-ups; +47.0±58.2%; p<0.001) and core strength (abdominal crunches; +9.2±23.3%; p=0.029) significantly increased from pre- to post-training. No statistically significant improvement or worsening was noted in any other performance assessment measure. Eight (28%) participants reported minor musculoskeletal concerns, of which only one required medical attention (injury rate 1.3 injuries/100 person-months). CONCLUSION: A protocolised linear periodisation training program was feasible and demonstrated improvements in fitness in a group of garrisoned Marines with low injury rates. Other military units may benefit from a similar approach.
PURPOSE: Performing well in combat requires military service members to be in peak physical shape. Although each branch of the United States military has fitness guidelines and assessments, there are no exact prescriptions for physical training programs. The absence of a standardised approach may lead to suboptimal physical performance and increased risk of musculoskeletal injury. To address this gap, we evaluated the feasibility of a pilot combat conditioning program based on linear periodisation. METHODS: Twenty-nine garrisoned US Marine Corps service members (25 men, 4 women; 23.5±4.4 years) enrolled in our 11-week conditioning program that was supervised by a strength and conditioning professional. Military-specific (physical/combat fitness tests) and general (treadmill-based maximal exercise test) assessments were performed at baseline and 11 weeks. Training and injury logs were maintained throughout the duration of the program. RESULTS: Approximately 80% (23/29) of service members completed the entire program. Cardiorespiratory fitness (Peak VO2; +8.10±10.9%; p=0.011), upper-body strength (pull-ups; +47.0±58.2%; p<0.001) and core strength (abdominal crunches; +9.2±23.3%; p=0.029) significantly increased from pre- to post-training. No statistically significant improvement or worsening was noted in any other performance assessment measure. Eight (28%) participants reported minor musculoskeletal concerns, of which only one required medical attention (injury rate 1.3 injuries/100 person-months). CONCLUSION: A protocolised linear periodisation training program was feasible and demonstrated improvements in fitness in a group of garrisoned Marines with low injury rates. Other military units may benefit from a similar approach.
Authors: Raymond J Gibbons; Gary J Balady; J Timothy Bricker; Bernard R Chaitman; Gerald F Fletcher; Victor F Froelicher; Daniel B Mark; Ben D McCallister; Aryan N Mooss; Michael G O'Reilly; William L Winters; Raymond J Gibbons; Elliott M Antman; Joseph S Alpert; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Gabriel Gregoratos; Loren F Hiratzka; Alice K Jacobs; Richard O Russell; Sidney C Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-10-16 Impact factor: 24.094