IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i11p6486-d824864.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Short-Term Reliability of the Conceptualised ‘Combat Readiness Assessment’

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Moore

    (Occupational Performance Research Group, University of Chichester, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 6PE, UK
    Sport and Exercise, Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BX, UK)

  • Martin Tayler

    (Sport and Exercise, Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BX, UK)

  • Stephen Moore

    (Ministry of Defence, Lyneham, Wiltshire, SN15 4XX, UK)

Abstract

Military fitness testing has historically assessed individual fitness components. Fitness assessments of this nature do not adequately monitor the physical requirements of military operations. The development of a more combat-specific fitness test would enhance accuracy in assessing the soldiers’ readiness for the demands of war. This study aimed to assess the short-term reliability of the conceptualised ‘Combat Readiness Assessment’ (CRA) following a single familiarisation trial with 21 male phase-two British Army Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineer (REME) recruits (age (years) 19.7 ± 2.5) split into two groups (N = 11 and 10) to conform with recruit availability. The CRA was designed to be a multifaceted fitness assessment aimed at replicating the physical demands of a combat situation for military personnel. Methods: Three repeated assessments of the CRA were completed over a 10-day period (trial one as a familiarisation) to assess the short-term reliability of the CRA post familiarisation. The CRA was completed carrying a 4 kg rifle (SA80 A2) and involved a 400 m (M) run wearing an 11 kg backpack (removed after the 400 M) followed by weighted carries, sprints, casualty drags and agility tasks. Completion time (seconds) was recorded to assess performance. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) (2,1) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), the standard error of the measurement (SEM) and the coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated for completion time for trials 1-3 (T1-3) and 2-3 (T2-3) to assess reliability post-familiarisation. Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) was calculated for T1-2 and T2-3. Descriptive statistics were calculated for completion time for T1-3 and T2-3. Results: The reliability following a familiarisation trial from T1-3 (ICC: 0.75; SEM: 7.1 s; CV: 9.97%) to T2-3 (ICC: 0.88; SEM: 6.4 s; CV: 10.05%) increased. Mean trial time decreased post familiarisation from T1-3 (210.9 ± 21.03 s) to T2-3 (206.3 ± 20.73 s). Conclusions: These findings are inconclusive regarding the short-term reliability of the CRA. The small sample size resulted in wide 95% confidence intervals associated with the ICCs, making the true ICC value hard to determine. The ICCs and MAPE suggest that the reliability of the CRA increased following a familiarisation trial, but this requires further research with a larger cohort to determine with confidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Moore & Martin Tayler & Stephen Moore, 2022. "The Short-Term Reliability of the Conceptualised ‘Combat Readiness Assessment’," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-10, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6486-:d:824864
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6486/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6486/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6486-:d:824864. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.