Injury and Illness Among Air Force Female Military Recruits.

Snedecor, Michael R.; Boudreau, Carla F.; Ellis, Bruce; Roth, Laurence M.; Schulman, Jane

doi:10.21236/ada327527

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cumulative injury incidence (proportion of trainees who experience one or more injuries during training) and injury rates (injured trainees per month) have been examined in a number of previous basic training studies and in infantry OSUT. 13,15,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40] Summary data from these studies are shown in Table 1. US Army BCT was extended from 8 to 9 weeks in October 1998 and thus studies performed before and after this time are separated in Table 1 to reflect the increased time at risk in the latter investigations.…”

Section: Injury Incidence In Basic Combat Training and Infantry Osutmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Soldier-Athlete Initiative: Program Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Athletic Trainers Compared to Musculoskeletal Action Teams in Initial Entry Training, Fort Leonard Wood, June 2010 - December 2011

Knapik¹,

Graham²,

Cobbs³

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A program evaluation was conducted at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri to determine the effectiveness of athletic trainers (ATs) and musculoskeletal action teams (MATs) for reducing injuries, reducing medical attrition, and improving physical fitness. The MAT consisted of a physical therapist, physical therapy technician, two ATs, and two certified strength and conditioning specialists. The evaluation involved two groups (MAT & AT), two phases or periods (baseline (B) & intervention (I)), and three types of training (Basic Combat Training, Military Police One-Station Unit Training [OSUT] and Engineer OSUT). The B phase examined the period before the MAT and ATs were in place, and the I phase after they were in place. Injuries were obtained from medical records. Attrition and Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) scores were obtained directly from the units involved in the evaluation. The B phase involved 53 training companies (n=7,387 men; 1,816 women) and the I phase involved 44 training companies (5,840 men; 1,817 women). Compared to the B phase, the number of injured male recruits seen in the clinic/hospital in the intervention phase decreased 17% in the MAT group (p<0.01) and 22% for the AT group (p<0.01); among the women, comparable declines were 22% in the MAT group (p<0.01) and 19% for the AT group (p<0.01). Compared to the B phase, the number of male injury-related medical encounters seen in the clinic/hospital in the I period declined 19% for the MAT group (p<0.01) and 17% for the AT group (p<0.01); among the women, comparable declines were 21% in the MAT group (p<0.01) and 8% in the AT group (p=0.33). When the injury encounters from the clinic/hospital were combined with those of the AT/MAT, the total numbers of male encounters in the I phase (compared to the B) was 11% higher in the MAT group and 44% higher in the AT group; among women I encounters were was 16% higher in the MAT group and 32% higher in the AT group. Compared to the B phase, medical attrition in the I phase was reduced 44% in the MAT group (p<0.01) and 17% in the AT group (p=0.35) among the men; among the women comparable reductions were 50% for the MAT group (p<0.01) and 6% for the AT group (p=0.79). Changes in scores from B to I were very small for both groups but total APFT scores (points) tended to remain the same or increase from the B to the I period in the MAT group, while values tended to remain the same or decrease for the AT group. APFT scores were generally higher in the I period for the MAT group when compared to the AT group. In summary, there was little difference between the MAT and AT groups in terms of the injury outcomes. However, there was generally a greater reduction in medical attrition and greater increases in physical fitness in the MAT group, although differences in fitness were minimal. These data favor the MAT model, primarily because of more favorable reductions in attrition.

show abstract