Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Reliability of the Kinetics of British Army Foot-Drill in Untrained Personnel

Rawcliffe, Alex J; Simpson, Richard J; Graham, Scott M; Psycharakis, Stelios G; Moir, Gavin L; Connaboy, Chris

Authors

Alex J Rawcliffe

Richard J Simpson

Scott M Graham

Stelios G Psycharakis

Gavin L Moir

Chris Connaboy



Abstract

The purpose of this study was to quantify the reliability of kinetic variables of British Army foot drill performance within untrained civilians and report the magnitude of vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) and vertical rate of force development (RFD) of foot drills. Fifteen recreational active males performed 3 testing sessions across a 1-week period, with each session separated by 24 hours. Within each testing session participants (mean ± SD; age 22.4 ± 1.7 years; height 177 ± 5.6 cm; weight 83 ± 8.7 kg) completed 10 trials of stand-at-attention (SaA), stand-at-ease (SaE), Halt, quick-march (QM) and a normal walking gait, with vGRF and vertical RFD measured on a force plate. Between-session and within-session reliability was calculated as systematic bias, coefficient of variation calculated from the typical error (CVte%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Significant (p ≤ 0.05) between-session differences were found for the vGRF SaA and SaE, and vertical RFD SaA and SaE conditions. Significant (p ≤ 0.05) within-session differences were found for the vGRF SaA and SaE conditions. A mean vGRF CVte% ≤10% was observed across all foot drills. However, the mean vertical RFD CVte% observed was ≥10% (excluding SaE) across all foot drills. The ICC analyses indicated that the vGRF Halt, QM, SaA, and Walk condition achieved moderate to large levels of test-retest reliability, with only SaE failing to achieve an ICC value ≥0.75. The vertical RFD QM, SaE, and Walk condition achieved moderate levels of test-retest reliability, with Halt and SaA failing to achieve an ICC value ≥0.75. It was determined that a single familiarization session and using the mean of 8 trials of vGRF are required to achieve acceptable levels of reliability.

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Feb 1, 2017
Deposit Date Mar 10, 2017
Journal Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Print ISSN 1064-8011
Publisher Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 31
Issue 2
Pages 435-444
DOI https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000001492
Keywords military, training, systematic bias, within-subject variation, test–retest reliability
Public URL http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/Output/810316