Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters: Minimum Muscular Strength and Endurance Requirements

The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity and specificity of surrogate physical ability tests as predictors of criterion firefighting task performance and to identify corresponding minimum muscular strength and endurance standards. Fifty-one (26 male; 25 female) participants completed three cr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 2017-01, Vol.59 (1), p.74-79
Main Authors: Stevenson, Richard D.M., Siddall, Andrew G., Turner, Philip F.J., Bilzon, James L.J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Firefighters
Muscular system
Occupational health
Original
Original Article
Visual task performance
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-41203cf545137c7da00f0345e9c20778046b42664798504aa85da2334e322b133
container_end_page 79
container_issue 1
container_start_page 74
container_title Journal of occupational and environmental medicine
container_volume 59
creator Stevenson, Richard D.M.
Siddall, Andrew G.
Turner, Philip F.J.
Bilzon, James L.J.
description The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity and specificity of surrogate physical ability tests as predictors of criterion firefighting task performance and to identify corresponding minimum muscular strength and endurance standards. Fifty-one (26 male; 25 female) participants completed three criterion tasks (ladder lift, ladder lower, ladder extension) and three corresponding surrogate tests [one-repetition maximum (1RM) seated shoulder press; 1RM seated rope pull-down; repeated 28 kg seated rope pull-down]. Surrogate test standards were calculated that best identified individuals who passed (sensitivity; true positives) and failed (specificity; true negatives) criterion tasks. Best sensitivity/specificity achieved were 1.00/1.00 for a 35 kg seated shoulder press, 0.79/0.92 for a 60 kg rope pull-down, and 0.83/0.93 for 23 repetitions of the 28 kg rope pull-down. These standards represent performance on surrogate tests commensurate with minimum acceptable performance of essential strength-based occupational tasks in UK firefighters.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000926
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5704671</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48501373</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48501373</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-41203cf545137c7da00f0345e9c20778046b42664798504aa85da2334e322b133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkV9LwzAUxYMoTqffQKXgiy_VJDdp0hdBxvwvCupzyNLUdbTNTDph397o5tA9mZcE7u8eTs5B6IDgU4JzcXb7-HCKf5-cZhtoh3DIUp4zuRnfWGQpFZz20G4IE4wJJ5hvox6VmHGJyQ4iT-N5qIyuk2Ezrd28sW2XPHe6LbQvQlI6n7zeJZeVt2X1Nu6sD3toq9R1sPvLu49eL4cvg-v0_vHqZnBxnxqgrEsZoRhMyRknIIwoNMYlBsZtbigWIhrIRoxmGRO55JhpLXmhKQCzQOmIAPTR-UJ3Ohs1tjDRmNe1mvqq0X6unK7U30lbjdWb-1BcRG1BosDJUsC795kNnWqqYGxd69a6WVBE5gIySZn8B8o5ABAqInq8hk7czLcxiW9K5pIBjRRbUMa7EGJ4K98Eq6_6VKxPrdcX145-_3m19NNXBA4XwCR0zq_mLEYYYwb4BJ8Om9w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1855898432</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters: Minimum Muscular Strength and Endurance Requirements</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Stevenson, Richard D.M. ; Siddall, Andrew G. ; Turner, Philip F.J. ; Bilzon, James L.J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Stevenson, Richard D.M. ; Siddall, Andrew G. ; Turner, Philip F.J. ; Bilzon, James L.J.</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity and specificity of surrogate physical ability tests as predictors of criterion firefighting task performance and to identify corresponding minimum muscular strength and endurance standards. Fifty-one (26 male; 25 female) participants completed three criterion tasks (ladder lift, ladder lower, ladder extension) and three corresponding surrogate tests [one-repetition maximum (1RM) seated shoulder press; 1RM seated rope pull-down; repeated 28 kg seated rope pull-down]. Surrogate test standards were calculated that best identified individuals who passed (sensitivity; true positives) and failed (specificity; true negatives) criterion tasks. Best sensitivity/specificity achieved were 1.00/1.00 for a 35 kg seated shoulder press, 0.79/0.92 for a 60 kg rope pull-down, and 0.83/0.93 for 23 repetitions of the 28 kg rope pull-down. These standards represent performance on surrogate tests commensurate with minimum acceptable performance of essential strength-based occupational tasks in UK firefighters.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1076-2752</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1536-5948</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000926</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28045801</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JOEMFM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, a business of Wolters Kluwer Health</publisher><subject>Firefighters ; Muscular system ; Occupational health ; Original ; Original Article ; Visual task performance</subject><ispartof>Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2017-01, Vol.59 (1), p.74-79</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2016 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine</rights><rights>Copyright Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Jan 2017</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-41203cf545137c7da00f0345e9c20778046b42664798504aa85da2334e322b133</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48501373$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48501373$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28045801$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stevenson, Richard D.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siddall, Andrew G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, Philip F.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bilzon, James L.J.</creatorcontrib><title>Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters: Minimum Muscular Strength and Endurance Requirements</title><title>Journal of occupational and environmental medicine</title><addtitle>J Occup Environ Med</addtitle><description>The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity and specificity of surrogate physical ability tests as predictors of criterion firefighting task performance and to identify corresponding minimum muscular strength and endurance standards. Fifty-one (26 male; 25 female) participants completed three criterion tasks (ladder lift, ladder lower, ladder extension) and three corresponding surrogate tests [one-repetition maximum (1RM) seated shoulder press; 1RM seated rope pull-down; repeated 28 kg seated rope pull-down]. Surrogate test standards were calculated that best identified individuals who passed (sensitivity; true positives) and failed (specificity; true negatives) criterion tasks. Best sensitivity/specificity achieved were 1.00/1.00 for a 35 kg seated shoulder press, 0.79/0.92 for a 60 kg rope pull-down, and 0.83/0.93 for 23 repetitions of the 28 kg rope pull-down. These standards represent performance on surrogate tests commensurate with minimum acceptable performance of essential strength-based occupational tasks in UK firefighters.</description><subject>Firefighters</subject><subject>Muscular system</subject><subject>Occupational health</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Visual task performance</subject><issn>1076-2752</issn><issn>1536-5948</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkV9LwzAUxYMoTqffQKXgiy_VJDdp0hdBxvwvCupzyNLUdbTNTDph397o5tA9mZcE7u8eTs5B6IDgU4JzcXb7-HCKf5-cZhtoh3DIUp4zuRnfWGQpFZz20G4IE4wJJ5hvox6VmHGJyQ4iT-N5qIyuk2Ezrd28sW2XPHe6LbQvQlI6n7zeJZeVt2X1Nu6sD3toq9R1sPvLu49eL4cvg-v0_vHqZnBxnxqgrEsZoRhMyRknIIwoNMYlBsZtbigWIhrIRoxmGRO55JhpLXmhKQCzQOmIAPTR-UJ3Ohs1tjDRmNe1mvqq0X6unK7U30lbjdWb-1BcRG1BosDJUsC795kNnWqqYGxd69a6WVBE5gIySZn8B8o5ABAqInq8hk7czLcxiW9K5pIBjRRbUMa7EGJ4K98Eq6_6VKxPrdcX145-_3m19NNXBA4XwCR0zq_mLEYYYwb4BJ8Om9w</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>Stevenson, Richard D.M.</creator><creator>Siddall, Andrew G.</creator><creator>Turner, Philip F.J.</creator><creator>Bilzon, James L.J.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, a business of Wolters Kluwer Health</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters</title><author>Stevenson, Richard D.M. ; Siddall, Andrew G. ; Turner, Philip F.J. ; Bilzon, James L.J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-41203cf545137c7da00f0345e9c20778046b42664798504aa85da2334e322b133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Firefighters</topic><topic>Muscular system</topic><topic>Occupational health</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Visual task performance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stevenson, Richard D.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siddall, Andrew G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, Philip F.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bilzon, James L.J.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of occupational and environmental medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stevenson, Richard D.M.</au><au>Siddall, Andrew G.</au><au>Turner, Philip F.J.</au><au>Bilzon, James L.J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters: Minimum Muscular Strength and Endurance Requirements</atitle><jtitle>Journal of occupational and environmental medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Occup Environ Med</addtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>59</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>74</spage><epage>79</epage><pages>74-79</pages><issn>1076-2752</issn><eissn>1536-5948</eissn><coden>JOEMFM</coden><abstract>The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity and specificity of surrogate physical ability tests as predictors of criterion firefighting task performance and to identify corresponding minimum muscular strength and endurance standards. Fifty-one (26 male; 25 female) participants completed three criterion tasks (ladder lift, ladder lower, ladder extension) and three corresponding surrogate tests [one-repetition maximum (1RM) seated shoulder press; 1RM seated rope pull-down; repeated 28 kg seated rope pull-down]. Surrogate test standards were calculated that best identified individuals who passed (sensitivity; true positives) and failed (specificity; true negatives) criterion tasks. Best sensitivity/specificity achieved were 1.00/1.00 for a 35 kg seated shoulder press, 0.79/0.92 for a 60 kg rope pull-down, and 0.83/0.93 for 23 repetitions of the 28 kg rope pull-down. These standards represent performance on surrogate tests commensurate with minimum acceptable performance of essential strength-based occupational tasks in UK firefighters.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, a business of Wolters Kluwer Health</pub><pmid>28045801</pmid><doi>10.1097/JOM.0000000000000926</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1076-2752
ispartof Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2017-01, Vol.59 (1), p.74-79
issn 1076-2752
1536-5948
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5704671
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Firefighters
Muscular system
Occupational health
Original
Original Article
Visual task performance
title Physical Employment Standards for UK Firefighters: Minimum Muscular Strength and Endurance Requirements
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T03%3A22%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Physical%20Employment%20Standards%20for%20UK%20Firefighters:%20Minimum%20Muscular%20Strength%20and%20Endurance%20Requirements&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20occupational%20and%20environmental%20medicine&rft.au=Stevenson,%20Richard%20D.M.&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=59&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=74&rft.epage=79&rft.pages=74-79&rft.issn=1076-2752&rft.eissn=1536-5948&rft.coden=JOEMFM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000926&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E48501373%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-41203cf545137c7da00f0345e9c20778046b42664798504aa85da2334e322b133%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1855898432&rft_id=info:pmid/28045801&rft_jstor_id=48501373&rfr_iscdi=true