Utility of preinduction tests as predictors of attrition in infantry recruits: a prospective study

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjmilitary-2021-001776
Author(s):  
Chen Fleischmann ◽  
R Yanovich ◽  
C Milgrom ◽  
U Eliyahu ◽  
H Gez ◽  
...  

IntroductionInfantry recruit attrition wastes resources and can affect combat readiness. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of preinduction tests as a predictor of attrition among conscripts in the first year of infantry training.Methods303 infantry conscripted recruits participated in a prospective study. Before their service, recruits received health profile and Quality Group Scores (QGSs). Recruits were screened at induction using questionnaires, by functional movement screening (FMS) and by upper and lower quarter Y-balance, dynamic and anthropometric tests. They were followed for musculoskeletal injuries and attrition during the first year of training.Results165/303 (54.5%) recruits were diagnosed with musculoskeletal injury or pain during the first year of their training. 15.2% did not complete their first year of service as combatants and 5.9% were discharged. On multivariable binary stepwise logistic regression analysis for attrition, protective factors were higher QGSs (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.89) and recruits diagnosed with musculoskeletal injuries or pain (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.48). Pain in the balance test performed at the beginning of training was a risk factor (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.44 to 7.61). These factors explained only 15.4% of the variance in attrition.ConclusionsFMS was not a significant predictor of infantry attrition. Measuring the three variables found to be associated with infantry attrition would seem to be valuable when the number of infantry candidates greatly exceeds the number of infantry positions. Transferring infantry attriters to non-combatant roles and not discharging them is a way to manage the problem of attrition.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Fleischmann ◽  
Ran Yanovich ◽  
Uri Eliyahu ◽  
Charles Milgrom ◽  
Hadar Gez ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundSoldiers in modern armies perform tasks that are increasingly technologically dependent. Training them to obtain necessary technological skills is both complex and expensive. Personnel attrition is costly and can affect military readiness. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of pre-induction tests as a predictor of attrition in the first year of infantry training.Methods303 infantry recruits participated in the study. Before beginning military service their health profile was determined and they were given a Quality Group score, which is determined by psycho-technical tests, a personal interview and the quality of their education. Recruits were screened shortly following induction using a battery of tests including questionnaires, anthropometrics, functional movement screening (FMS), upper and lower quarter Y balance tests, dynamic tests, and followed by orthopaedists and their unit doctors for orthopaedic injuries and problems during the first year of training.Results165/303 (54.5%) recruits were diagnosed with injury or pain during the course of their first year of training. 46 recruits (15.1%) did not complete their first year of service as combatants and 18 (5.9%) were discharged from service. On multivariable analysis for attrition, protective factors were higher Quality Group scores (OR 0.78, CI 0.69-0.89) and recruits diagnosed with orthopaedic injuries or musculoskeletal pain (OR 0.21 CI 0.09-0.50). Pain in the balance test performed at the beginning of training was a risk factor (OR 3.39, CI 1.47-7.79). These factors together are only responsible for 15.4% of infantry attrition according to partial eta squared analysis. ConclusionsThe three variables found by multivariable analysis to be associated with infantry attrition in this study together are responsible for 15.4% of the attrition. Measuring these variables would seem to be most valuable in armies in which the number of candidates for a specific infantry unit greatly exceeds the number of positions. The IDF approach of trying to keep attriters within the Army in non-combatant roles and not discharging them from service is a way to manage the problem of infantry attrition. Trial RegistrationProspectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov, registration number NCT02091713


2015 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 648
Author(s):  
Ludmila M. Cosio-Lima ◽  
Joseph J. Knapik ◽  
Richard Shumway ◽  
Jeffrey Schaffnit ◽  
Katy Reynolds ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 181 (7) ◽  
pp. 643-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludmila Cosio-Lima ◽  
Joseph J. Knapik ◽  
Richard Shumway ◽  
Katy Reynolds ◽  
Youngil Lee ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 352-361
Author(s):  
Priscila dos Santos Bunn ◽  
Elirez Bezerra da Silva

ABSTRACT Dynamic Movement AssessmentTM (DMATM) and Functional Movement ScreeningTM (FMSTM) are tools to predict the risk of musculoskeletal injuries in individuals who practice physical activities. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the association of DMATM and FMSTM with the risk of musculoskeletal injuries, in different physical activities, categorizing by analysis. A research without language or time filters was carried out in November 2016 in MEDLINE, Google Scholar, SciELO, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and BVS databases using the keywords: “injury prediction”, “injury risk”, “sensitivity”, “specificity”, “functional movement screening”, and “dynamic movement assessment”. Prospective studies that analyzed the association between DMATM and FMSTM with the risk of musculoskeletal injuries in physical activities were included. The data extracted from the studies were: participant’s profile, sample size, injury’s classification criteria, follow-up time, and the results presented, subdivided by the type of statistical analysis. The risk of bias was performed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. No study with DMATM was found. A total of 20 FMSTM studies analyzing one or more of the following indicators were included: diagnostic accuracy (PPV, NPV and AUC), odds ratios (OR) or relative risk (RR). FMSTM showed a sensitivity=12 to 99%; specificity=38 to 97%; PPV=25 to 91%; NPV=28 to 85%; AUC=0.42 to 0.68; OR=0.53 to 54.5; and RR=0.16-5.44. The FMSTM has proven to be a predictor of musculoskeletal injuries. However, due to methodological limitations, its indiscriminate usage should be avoided.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 1157-1162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph J. Knapik ◽  
Ludimila M. Cosio-Lima ◽  
Katy L. Reynolds ◽  
Richard S. Shumway

Epidemiology ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. S46
Author(s):  
XIAO-MING SHEN ◽  
CHONG-HUAI YAN ◽  
DI GUO ◽  
SHENGMEI WU ◽  
LI-MING AO ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saša Jovanović ◽  
Adriana Ljubojević ◽  
Violeta Novaković

The aim of this research was to verify the FMS (Functional Movement Screening) method as apredictor of success in performing gymnastic elements on the floor routine and vault, on aselected sample composed of 36 male subjects aged 20 - 22 years, students of Faculty ofPhysical Education and Sport, University of Banja Luka. A battery of 11 motor skills tests wasassessed: 7 at floor routine (side-to-side and front-to-back cartwheel, roundoff, front and backhandspring, forward and backward flip) and 4 on vault (squat through on the vault and straddlevault with pre-flight, front handspring on vault, roundoff vault) together with FMS resultsall results received normal distribution and a relatively low average FMS value(14.313), which according to many authors is near the limit of the risk of injury (14). The overallresults of the correlation analysis indicated statistically significant relationship between FMSand variables PRENAZ (0.049) and SALNAZ (0.038) at significance level of0.05, while the applied regression analysis gave general information on the prediction modelthat showed statistical significance of 0.03 with the predictor variable FMS at the level of significance0.05. Observing the values of the determination coefficients R2, it was establishedthat the FMS method can predict the performance of the selected gymnastic elements on thefloor routine and the vault as an integral model, explaining about 96% of the common variabilitywith a criterion, representing a significant statistical value.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document