Paper
Sunday, November 4, 2007
170
Impact of Body Armor on Physical Work Performance
Richard Ricciardi, PhD, CRNP, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA, Laura Talbot, PhD, EdD, RN, Graduate School of Nursing, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA, and Christine E. Kasper, RN, PhD, FAAN, FACSM, Nursing, Veterans Administration, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| Learning Objective #1: To identify the physiological impact and health risks associated with wearing body armor |
| Learning Objective #2: To discuss strategies for preventing or mitigating negative effects of wearing body armor |
Introduction: Body armor is widely used by military, police, security and first responder personnel for protection against fragmentation, handgun, and rifle projectile injuries. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to identify the physiologic impact and health risks associated with wearing body armor and to develop strategies to prevent or mitigate negative health effects. Methods: A within-subject, repeated-measures design was used: 34 participants volunteered to undergo two experimental conditions: with body armor and without body armor. Subjects walked on a treadmill for 30 minutes at a slow and moderate pace and completed a physical performance battery. Results: Subjects with body armor as compared to those without body armor had significantly greater increases in: oxygen uptake at a slow and moderate pace; blood lactate at a moderate pace; heart rate at slow and moderate pace; and rating of perceived physical exertion at slow and moderate pace. Physical tasks were significantly affected by body armor: under the body armor condition, men performed 61% fewer pull-ups and women’s hang-time was reduced by 63%; stair stepping was reduced by 16%. When examining gender differences, female and male subjects with body armor, as compared to those without body armor, had no significant differences in percent increase in VO2, heart rate, or respiratory rate at slow or moderate pace walking while wearing body armor. However, women, as compared to men, had a significantly increased difference in the rating of perceived physical exertion between wearing and not wearing body armor at slow pace. Body fat, heart rate and blood lactate were the best predictors of treadmill test completion while wearing body armor. Conclusions: Wearing body armor imposes a sizeable impact on physical performance and increases heath risks. The potential for physical exhaustion is high and performance of physical tasks is markedly impaired when wearing body armor.