Physiological responses to simulated firefighter exercise protocols in varying environments

Abstract

For decades, research to quantify the effects of firefighting activities and personal protective equipment on physiology and biomechanics has been conducted in a variety of testing environments. It is unknown if these different environments provide similar information and comparable responses. A novel Firefighting Activities Station, which simulates four common fireground tasks, is presented for use with an environmental chamber in a controlled laboratory setting. Nineteen firefighters completed three different exercise protocols following common research practices. Simulated firefighting activities conducted in an environmental chamber or live-fire structures elicited similar physiological responses (max heart rate: 190.1 vs 188.0 bpm, core temperature response: 0.047°C/min vs 0.043°C/min) and accelerometry counts. However, the response to a treadmill protocol commonly used in laboratory settings resulted in significantly lower heart rate (178.4 vs 188.0 bpm), core temperature response (0.037°C/min vs 0.043°C/min) and physical activity counts compared with firefighting activities in the burn building. Practitioner Summary: We introduce a new approach for simulating realistic firefighting activities in a controlled laboratory environment for ergonomics assessment of fire service equipment and personnel. Physiological responses to this proposed protocol more closely replicate those from live-fire activities than a traditional treadmill protocol and are simple to replicate and standardise.

Development of Fireground Exposure Simulator (FES) Prop for PPE Testing and Evaluation

“…For firefighter activity trials, three separate FAS stations were set up within each chamber along the wall connected to the combustion chamber. Activities, including stair climbing, crawling, hose advance and overhaul, were conducted on 2-min work/rest cycles for the FAS [17,18]. Timing with the ignition of the sofa and ventilation of the exposure chambers was coordinated to create conditions that were similar to what is often experienced during firefighting operations.…”

“…Thus, with FAST testing, it is not clear how the PPE interfaces may be stressed and potentially result in firefighter exposures during such realistic movements. Protocols such as the Firefighting Activities Station (FAS) [17,18], have been developed from firefighter physiology-based studies over two decades [19][20][21]. The FAS involves firefighters conducting various activities similar to what they would perform on the fireground-climbing stairs, searching a room, advancing a hoseline and pulling down ceiling materials-in a manner that allows firefighters to develop proper technique under controlled conditions and allows quantification of the work completed.…”

Analysis of foot clearance in firefighters during ascent and descent of stairs

“…In situations which inherently have a higher STF risk, it may be advisable to take one step at a time, placing both feet on a single step between movements; thereby reducing the displacement of the center of mass and reducing the risk of a stair contact. No significant differences due to Protocol were found for any parameter presented in this paper, even though testing Protocol resulted in significant differences in other parameters evaluated in the larger study, i.e., heart rate and core temperature (Horn et al, 2015) and level ground gait biomechanics (Sy et al, 2013). The relatively rigid requirements of foot position placements necessary to safely traverse the stairs may explain why significant differences in the physical and thermal stress induced in each of the three protocols did not significantly impact foot clearances over stair edges, yet did impact heart rate, core temperature and level ground walking.…”

“…1) that was completed before and after three different testing protocols designed to replicate workloads associated with firefighting activities. Horn et al (2015) provides a detailed description of the three protocols that include: (1) walking on a treadmill (4.5 km/h at a 2.5% incline) in an environmental chamber (47 C, 30% humidity) (ECTM), (2) simulated firefighting tasks in an environmental chamber (47 C, 30% humidity) (ECFF), and (3) simulated firefighting tasks in a burn building with live-fire (135 C at 30 cm from ceiling, 85 C at 120 cm from the floor, 30 C at 30 cm above the floor, very low humidity) (BBFF). Simulated firefighting tasks consisted of four activities, where a single activity (climbing stairs, advancing a weighted hoseline, searching a room, pulling down a ceiling) was performed for 2 min, followed by a 2 min rest period.…”

Development of Firefighting Performance Test Drills while Wearing Personal Protective Equipment

“…우선, 소방관 은 약 20~30 kg에 달하는 소방용 개인보호구를 항상 착용 해야 하는데, 이는 소방관의 산소소비량을 증가시키며 (2,5,6) , 근피로도와 서열부담을 가중시킨다 (8)(9)(10)(11) . Skoldstrom (12) 은 45 o C에서 3.5 km · h (15) , 고온의 환경온도로 유지 되는 실험실에서 수행하거나 (16) , 짧은 휴식을 사이에 둔 여 러 번의 반복 작업, 혹은 실험 및 평가 환경의 적합성을 고려하여 세부적인 평가 방법에 변화를 준다. 소방관의 화재진압 업무 적합도 평가에서의 또 다른 이 슈는 평가 방법, 즉 채점 방식이다.…”