Characterising Psycho-Physiological Responses and Relationships during a Military Field Training Exercise

Sean Bulmer, Sean L. Corrigan, Jace R. Drain, Jamie L. Tait, Brad Aisbett, Spencer Roberts, Paul B. Gastin and Luana C. Main ()
Additional contact information
Sean Bulmer: Deakin University, Centre for Sport Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Sean L. Corrigan: Deakin University, Centre for Sport Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Jace R. Drain: Defence Science and Technology Group, Fisherman’s Bend, Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
Jamie L. Tait: Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Brad Aisbett: Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Spencer Roberts: Deakin University, Centre for Sport Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Paul B. Gastin: La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia
Luana C. Main: Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 22, 1-18

Abstract: Over a 15-day period, that included an eight-day field trial, the aims of this study were to (1) quantify the physical workload, sleep and subjective well-being of soldiers in training; (2a) Explore relationships between workload and well-being, and (2b) sleep and well-being; (3) Explore relationships between workload, sleep, and well-being. Methods: Sixty-two Combat Engineer trainees (59 male, 3 female; age: 25.2 ± 7.2 years) wore an ActiGraph GT9X to monitor daily energy expenditure, physical activity, and sleep. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE), sleep quality, and fatigue were measured daily, subjective well-being was reported days 1, 5, 9, 13 and 15. Multi-level models were used for the analysis. Results: Well-being was affected by a combination of variables including workload, subjective sleep quality, sleep duration, and sleep efficiency. RPE and subjective sleep quality were consistently significant parameters within the models of best fit. Conclusions: Perceptions of well-being were lower during the field training when physical workload increased, and sleep decreased. Energy expenditure was comparatively low, while daily sleep duration was consistent with field training literature. Subjective assessments of workload and sleep quality were consistently effective in explaining variations in well-being and represent an efficient approach to monitor training status of personnel.

Keywords: army; self-report; energy expenditure; MTDS; sleep deprivation; engineers (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/14767/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/14767/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:14767-:d:968325

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().