Grier Tyson, Canham-Chervak Michelle, Anderson Morgan K, Bushman Timothy T, Jones Bruce H
US Army Public Health Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.
US Army Med Dep J. 2015 Apr-Jun:33-41.
As combat arms occupations become available to women, adequate muscular strength and aerobic endurance will be essential for the completion of physically demanding job-related tasks. Therefore, in addition to US Army Physical Readiness Training, Soldiers will often engage in their own personal physical fitness training programs.
To evaluate fitness and injury outcomes for women participating in personal cross-training programs compared to women performing one mode of training or having no personal fitness program.
Demographics, physical training activities, physical fitness, and injuries were obtained from surveys administered to female Soldiers in an infantry division. Women were categorized into the following 4 groups based on their personal physical fitness program: cross-training (CT), running only (R), weight training only (WT), and no personal fitness program (NPF). An ANOVA was used to compare physical training, health behaviors, and physical fitness across groups. A χ² test was used to compare injury rates between fitness programs. Risk (%), risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to determine injury risk.
A total of 620 women completed the survey and indicated whether or not they had a personal fitness program (cross-training, n=260; running only, n=93; weight training only, n=86; no personal fitness program, n=181). Average age and body mass index was 26.2±5.8 years and 24.5±3.3 kg/m² respectively with no differences between the 4 fitness groups. The cross-training group had higher physical performance on the muscular endurance (push-ups and sit-ups) portion of the Army physical fitness test (APFT) when compared to the 3 other groups (CT 42 push-ups vs (R 38, WT 35, NPF 36)); (CT 68 sit-ups vs (R 63, WT 62, NPF 62)). For the aerobic endurance (2-mile run) portion of the APFT, the cross-training group had higher performance when compared to those with no personal fitness program (CT 17.4 minutes vs NPF 18.5 minutes). Overall, 53% of female Soldiers sustained an injury over a 12-month period. All injury rates and lower extremity injury rates among women with a cross-training personal fitness program were not different from the other personal fitness programs. Those performing cross-training were 2.6 and 2.1 times more likely to experience a running related injury when compared to those in the weight training and no personal fitness group, respectively. On the other hand, women performing cross-training were 65% less likely to experience a lifting/moving heavy objects related injury when compared to the weight training only group.
Women who participated in a cross-training program for personal physical fitness training had higher muscular endurance compared to the other fitness groups and higher aerobic endurance when compared to the no personal fitness group. There were no differences for all injuries and lower body injuries between cross-training and other fitness programs. Cross-training may be the best option for improving physical fitness when compared to just one mode of fitness training.
随着作战兵种岗位向女性开放,足够的肌肉力量和有氧耐力对于完成体力要求高的工作相关任务至关重要。因此,除了美国陆军体能训练外,士兵们通常还会参与自己的个人体能训练计划。
评估参与个人交叉训练计划的女性与进行单一训练模式或没有个人体能计划的女性相比的体能和受伤情况。
通过对一个步兵师的女性士兵进行调查,获取人口统计学信息、体育训练活动、体能和受伤情况。根据个人体能计划,女性被分为以下4组:交叉训练(CT)组、仅跑步(R)组、仅进行力量训练(WT)组和没有个人体能计划(NPF)组。使用方差分析比较各组之间的体育训练、健康行为和体能。使用χ²检验比较各体能计划之间的受伤率。风险(%)、风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(95%CI)用于确定受伤风险。
共有620名女性完成了调查,并表明她们是否有个人体能计划(交叉训练组,n = 260;仅跑步组,n = 93;仅进行力量训练组,n = 86;没有个人体能计划组,n = 181)。平均年龄和体重指数分别为26.2±5.8岁和24.5±3.3kg/m²,4个体能组之间无差异。与其他3组相比,交叉训练组在美国陆军体能测试(APFT)的肌肉耐力(俯卧撑和仰卧起坐)部分表现更好(CT组42个俯卧撑,而R组38个、WT组35个、NPF组36个);(CT组68个仰卧起坐,而R组63个、WT组62个、NPF组62个)。在APFT的有氧耐力(2英里跑)部分,交叉训练组比没有个人体能计划的组表现更好(CT组17.4分钟,而NPF组18.5分钟)。总体而言,53%的女性士兵在12个月内受过伤。有交叉训练个人体能计划的女性的所有受伤率和下肢受伤率与其他个人体能计划组没有差异。与力量训练组和没有个人体能计划组相比,进行交叉训练的女性发生跑步相关损伤的可能性分别高出2.6倍和2.1倍。另一方面,与仅进行力量训练组相比,进行交叉训练的女性发生搬运重物相关损伤的可能性低65%。
参与个人体能交叉训练计划的女性与其他体能组相比,肌肉耐力更高,与没有个人体能计划的组相比,有氧耐力更高。交叉训练与其他体能计划在所有损伤和下半身损伤方面没有差异。与单一训练模式相比,交叉训练可能是提高体能的最佳选择。