Executive Summary From the National Strength and Conditioning Association's Second Blue Ribbon Panel on Military Physical Readiness: Military Physical Performance Testing.

The National Strength and Conditioning Association's tactical strength and conditioning program sponsored the second Blue Ribbon Panel on military physical readiness: military physical performance testing, April 18-19, 2013, Norfolk, VA. This meeting brought together a total of 20 subject matter experts (SMEs) from the U.S. Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and academia representing practitioners, operators, researchers, and policy advisors to discuss the current state of physical performance testing across the Armed Services. The SME panel initially rated 9 common military tasks (jumping over obstacles, moving with agility, carrying heavy loads, dragging heavy loads, running long distances, moving quickly over short distances, climbing over obstacles, lifting heavy objects, loading equipment) by the degree to which health-related fitness components (e.g., aerobic fitness, muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, and body composition) and skill-related fitness components (e.g., muscular power, agility, balance, coordination, speed, and reaction time) were required to accomplish these tasks. A scale from 1 to 10 (10 being highest) was used. Muscular strength, power, and endurance received the highest rating scores. Panel consensus concluded that (a) selected fitness components (particularly for skill-related fitness components) are currently not being assessed by the military; (b) field-expedient options to measure both health-based and skill-based fitness components are currently available; and

[1]  W. Mathis,et al.  DoD Physical Fitness and Body Fat Programs Procedures , 1995 .

[2]  W J Kraemer,et al.  Effect of resistance training on women's strength/power and occupational performances. , 2001, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[3]  Daniel J. Dodd,et al.  How Do They Compare?: An Assessment of Predeployment Fitness in the Arizona National Guard , 2011, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[4]  Barry A. Spiering,et al.  Physiological Employment Standards III: physiological challenges and consequences encountered during international military deployments , 2013, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[5]  J. Hogan,et al.  Structure of physical performance in occupational tasks. , 1991, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Marilyn A. Sharp,et al.  Task-specific and generalized physical training for improving manual-material handling capability , 1998 .

[7]  Daniel S. Moran,et al.  Physiological employment standards IV: integration of women in combat units physiological and medical considerations , 2013, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[8]  B. Alvar,et al.  Influence of Training Frequency on Fitness Levels and Perceived Health Status in Deployed National Guard Soldiers , 2013, Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

[9]  C. Caspersen,et al.  Physical activity, exercise, and physical fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research. , 1985, Public health reports.

[10]  Bruce H Jones,et al.  Strategies for optimizing military physical readiness and preventing musculoskeletal injuries in the 21st century. , 2013, U.S. Army Medical Department journal.