KSOEM
Articles
- Page Path
- HOME > Ann Occup Environ Med > Volume 28; 2016 > Article
- Research Article Associations between anthropometric characteristics and physical performance in male law enforcement officers: a retrospective cohort study
- James Jay Dawes, Robin Marc Orr, Claire Louise Siekaniec, Andrea Annie Vanderwoude, Rodney Pope
-
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2016;28:26.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-016-0112-5
Published online: June 10, 2016
Department of Health Sciences, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO USA 
Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Robina, Queensland Australia
Gatorade sports nutrition intern, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA USA
• Received: January 3, 2016 • Accepted: May 25, 2016
© The Author(s). 2016
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Abstract
-
Background Police officers are often required to undertake physically demanding tasks, like lifting, dragging and pursuing a suspect. Therefore, physical performance is a key requirement.
-
Methods Retrospective data for 76 male police officers (mean age = 39.42 ± 8.41 years; mean weight = 84.21 ± 12.91 kg) was obtained. Data included anthropometric (skinfolds, estimated percentage body fat, lean body mass and fat mass) and physical performance (1 Repetition Maximum Bench Press, 1–min sit-ups, 1-min push-ups, vertical jump, 300 m run, 1.5 mile run) measures and correlations between anthropometric measurement and fitness score were obtained.
-
Results Estimated percentage body fat was significantly (p ≤ .001) and negatively correlated with all performance measures, except sit-ups and 300 m and 1.5 mile run performance. Estimated lean body mass was significantly and positively (p ≤ .001) correlated with push-ups, bench press and vertical jump measures, while increasing estimated fat mass was significantly (p ≤ .001) associated with reduced performance on sit-up, vertical jump, 1.5 mile run and estimated maximal voluntary oxygen uptake.
-
Conclusions A targeted approach, going beyond just decreasing percentage body fat to also selectively increasing lean mass, should be applied for optimal improvement in physical fitness performance.
Background
At any point in time, on-duty law enforcement officers may be required to push, pull, lift, carry, drag, jump, vault, crawl, sprint, use force, and sustain pursuit of a suspect [1–3]. Therefore, physical fitness is a key requirement for this population. Although there are no national standards of physical fitness for law enforcement officers, The Cooper Institute of Aerobic Fitness [4] recommends a battery of tests for this population that includes 1-min sit-up and 1-min push-up tests to assess muscular endurance, a 1 repetition max (RM) bench press (BP) to assess muscular strength, a 300 m run and vertical jump test to assess anaerobic power, and a 1.5 mile run to assess aerobic fitness. Although these fitness tests cannot serve as a complete predictor of overall fitness and job performance, empirical research has shown a link between levels of fitness and risk of injury [5, 6]. Furthermore, levels of fitness, and in turn cardiovascular health, are known to be related to the risks of cardiovascular disease; a recognized cause of mortality in police officers, with police officers twice as likely as the general population to suffer this disease [7]. On this basis, means of improving, or at least maintaining, levels of fitness are important.
Anthropometric measurements, like skinfold measurements, are often used as a predictor of performance and health status in the general population [8]. While anthropometric measurements may not be suitable as a determinant of law enforcement selection they may be useful in predicting physical capability, job performance and, as such, identifying areas for improvement, particularly at a cohort level. Considering this, limited research has been done in tactical populations (like firefighter/first responder, military and law enforcement) on the use of skin fold anthropometric measurements, with the results suggesting a relationship between skinfold thickness and physical performance.
Williford and Scharf-Olson [9] demonstrated a relationship between sum of skinfolds and job performance in firefighters. Overall, the researchers found that a higher percentage of body fat was linked with poorer performance in simulated job tasks and could be used as a predictor of job performance. Similarly, Ricciardi, et al. [10] observed a reduced aerobic capacity and load carriage task performance ability in military participants with increased levels of body fat. Even when participants were wearing relatively light loads (10 kg body armour), the amount of body fat of males (17 %) and females (26 %) was found to negatively correlate (r = −0.88; p < .001) with physical task performance [10]. In a recent study of a law enforcement population, Dawes et al. [11] found that the sum of skinfolds, as recommended by Jackson and Pollock, was negatively correlated with muscular endurance assessments (push-ups, sit-ups, pull-ups) as well as obstacle course performance in Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) officers. The strongest significant relationship occurred between sum of skinfolds and pull-up assessment. While these reported relationships between fat mass and physical fitness performance do not provide conclusive evidence of cause-and-effect relationships, they do suggest that physical training to decrease overall fat mass may, either directly (reducing the non-functional mass to be lifted) or indirectly (muscular training effect) have a positive impact on muscular endurance performance. These reported relationships therefore warrant further scrutiny.
Not all studies support the findings of poorer physical performance with increased levels of body fat. Both Frykman, et al. [12] and Pandorf, et al. [13] found that body fat (21-32 %) did not affect assessed performance of load carriage tasks like obstacle courses and a 3.2 km loaded run. However, whether this finding reflected body fat alone, or the influence of overall body weight and stature on absolute VO2max, was not apparent. Given the contrasting findings, and the reliance that society places upon these tactical personnel having the physical capability to perform their jobs efficiently and effectively, further research, specifically investigating associations between body composition and physical performance in a law enforcement population may be of benefit. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate and report on the relationship between body composition (as determined through skinfold measurements) and physical fitness performance in male law enforcement officers.
Methods
Retrospective data for seventy-six (n = 76) male law enforcement officers (mean age = 39.42 ± 8.41 year; mean weight = 84.21 ± 12.91 kg; mean est. VO2 max = 41.31 ± 65 ml/kg/min) belonging to a volunteer fitness program were analysed in this investigation. Approval was obtained from the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Institutional Review Board for human subjects (IRB 15-074) and the Bond University Human Research Ethics Committee (RO1927), prior to the analysis of this retrospective data.
All anthropometric measures (weight and 3-site skinfold measurements) and muscular strength, power and endurance assessments (1 RM Bench press, 1 –min sit-ups, 1-min push-ups, vertical jump) had been conducted indoors at the law enforcement agency’s training facility. Measures of anaerobic (300 m) and aerobic (1.5 mile run) fitness had been performed with participants running around a predetermined course spanning local city blocks as fast as possible. Assessment protocols and order used when the retrospective data were collected are listed below.
Weight
Weight (lbs) measurements for the officers were collected using standard procedures on a doctors beam scale (Cardinal; Detecto Scale Co, Webb City, MO), and then entered into a spreadsheet and converted to kgs.
Skinfold measurements
Employing the skinfold assessment protocol as recommended by Jackson and Pollock [14] and previously employed in a law enforcement population [11], sum of skinfolds (SS) were collected from three sites. Duplicate measures of the chest, abdomen, and thigh were taken on the right side of the body using Lange Skinfold Calipers (Lange, Beta Technology Inc, Cambridge, MD), rotating among sites to allow skin to regain normal texture and thickness, and recorded to the nearest centimeter. Percentage body fat (%BF), lean body mass (LBM [kg]) and fat mass (FM [kg]) were calculated using scale weight and the prediction formula provided by Jackson and Pollock [15].
1-min push-ups
Upper-body muscular endurance was measured using a protocol previously employed in a law enforcement population [11] with the duration modified to 1-min. All officers were required to begin the test with the body rigid and straight, the elbows fully extended, the hands positioned slightly wider than shoulder-width apart and the fingers pointed forward. This position constituted the ‘up’ position. To facilitate and control push-up depth, a partner placed a closed fist on the floor directly under the officer’s chest. On the verbal command ‘go’ the participant proceeded to bend their elbows, lowering themselves until their chest was in contact with their partner’s fist and then extending their elbows until back in the ‘up’ position. The officer continued in this fashion repeating as many repetitions as possible within the 1-min period recorded by the tester on a handheld stopwatch. Officers were allowed to rest in the straight-arm position, as long a neutral trunk position was maintained and the time had not elapsed. The test was terminated when an officer was unable to perform this movement with proper technique, or when the 1-min time limit expired.
1-min sit-ups
The technique used for this test is detailed by Hoffman and Collingwood [16]. All officers were required to begin the assessment lying in a supine position with the knees bent to around 90° and the feet flat on the ground. Hands were placed behind the neck with fingers interlaced. Once in position the participant flexed their trunk, elevating their shoulders off the floor until their elbows touched their knees. During this assessment each officer had a partner anchor their feet in place to assist in keeping the feet flat on the floor throughout the exercise movement. On the verbal command ‘go’ the tester began the stopwatch and the participant began the assessment. The officers then proceeded to perform as many sit-ups as possible in 1-min using this technique.
Vertical jump
Vertical jump height was collected using a Vertec™ apparatus (Vertec Scientific Ltd., Aldermaston, UK). After determining the standing upward reach height for each officer they were instructed to perform a rapid countermovement jump with an arm swing, jump as high as possible, and attempt to displace the horizontal plastic fins on the device. The best of three attempts was taken and maximal jump height was recorded to the nearest 1.2 cm (0.5 in.). Peak power output was then calculated using the Sayers power equation (See Equation 1) [17]. This equation is considered to be more valid than that of Harman et al [18] in estimating peak power from vertical jump [17].
Equation 1: Sayers [17] Peak Power equation
[TeX:] \documentclass[12pt]{minimal}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{upgreek}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}
\begin{document}$$ Peak\ power\ (Watts)=60.7\times height(cm)+45.3\times body\ mass(kg)-2055 $$\end{document}Peak power Watts = 60.7 × height cm + 45.3 × body mass kg − 2055
1 RM bench press
Officers were instructed to begin by lying down in a standard bench press rack and positioning themselves on the flat bench. Officers were then instructed to maintain a 5-point contact (head, shoulders and glutes in contact with the bench and both feet on the floor). Eyes were lined up directly below the barbell on the rack. The barbell was then lifted off the rack until it was positioned directly over the officer’s chest. In a controlled manner, the officer lowered the bar to the chest, lightly touched the bar against the chest, then extended the arms to return the bar to the starting position. This 1RM was then converted to a 1RM Bench press ratio (BPR) score (weight lifted/body weight) in order to measure relative upper-body strength.
300 meter run
A 300 m course was measured around a city block. Officers were instructed to run this course, as fast as possible. Upon completion each participant’s time was recorded to the nearest 0.10 s on a hand held stopwatch.
1.5 mile run
A ¾ mile course was measured around local city blocks. Following a 2 h rest, officers were instructed to run this course twice, as fast as possible. Upon completion each participant’s time was recorded to the nearest 0.10 s on a hand held stopwatch. Estimated VO2 max was then calculated using charts provided by the Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research [19].
The data was entered into a computer file suitable for statistical analysis using the SPSS 22.0 software package [20]. A descriptive statistical analysis was conducted to determine mean scores and standard deviations for each skinfold site and each measure of performance. Participant results were summarized for two participant groupings, based on anthropometric results. These groups were: (i) those participants found to have an ‘above average’ percentage body fat for their age group; being above 15.0 % for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and above 17.0 % for males up to 50 years of age; and (ii) ‘average’ percentage body fat and below, being 15.0 % and below for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and 17.0 % and below for males up to 50 years of age [8]. These groups were devised from normative data in order to allow for future simplified categorizations through which to implement potential recommendations. Differences between these groups in physical performance on the measured fitness characteristics were first determined using an independent samples t-test, and subsequently using an ANCOVA with age included as a covariate. Pearson’s correlation analyses were performed to investigate relationships between the anthropometric and performance measures. The level of statistical significance was set a priori at 0.001. This stringent level of significance was chosen in order to control the family-wise error rate (or probability of making spurious significant findings, or Type I errors, when conducting multiple statistical tests of hypotheses), that would otherwise accompany the large number of statistical tests performed [21].
Results
Descriptive results for actual and estimated anthropometric measurements and actual and estimated fitness performance results for the cohort as a whole and for each of the two body fat groups are presented in Table 1. Significant differences between the two groups are also indicated in Table 1, based on the results of independent samples t-tests.
Table 1
Descriptive information for full-time officers as a cohort and by %BF groupings
aSignificant difference between groups, with p < .001
bGroups: i) ‘Average and below’ included participants with a %BF of 15.0 % and below for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and 17.0 % and below for males up to 50 years of age, and ii) ‘Above average’ included participants with a %BF above 15.0 % for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and above 17.0 % for males up to 50 years of age [8]
The ANCOVA (Table 2) indicated that age was not a significant predictor of any of the performance variables, when the level of significance was set at 0.001 as planned. While participants with an above average %BF were observed to consistently perform at a lower level on physical fitness tests than those with average or below average %BF (Table 1), this difference only reached statistical significance (p ≤ .001; Tables 1 and 2) in push-ups, vertical jump height and bench press ratio.
Table 2
ANCOVA results between groups with age as the covariate
Table 3 demonstrates the correlations between specific anthropometric measurements and specific physical fitness test results. Consistent with the findings reported from the independent samples t-tests (Table 1) and ANCOVA (Table 2), comparing groups based on %BF, the Pearson’s correlation analyses indicated that body composition, assessed in terms of %BF, was significantly correlated with push-ups, vertical jump height, bench press ratio and estimated VO2max (Table 3). However, there were differences noted in the associations between estimated lean mass (LM; kg) and estimated fat mass (FM; kg) and physical fitness performance measures. LM was significantly and positively correlated with push-ups, vertical jump height, estimated peak power, bench press and bench press ratio, while increasing FM was significantly associated with reductions in performance on vertical jump, 1.5 mi run and estimated VO2max (Table 3).
Table 3
Correlations between anthropometric measures and fitness scores
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between body composition (as determined through skinfold measurements) and physical fitness performance in male law enforcement officers. In general, the results suggest that body composition, when assessed in terms of %BF or FM (measured in kg) or LM (also measured in kg), is associated with physical fitness performance. Apart from the intuitive association between higher %BF and its associated poorer performance, the results go further in suggesting that FM may not be strongly associated with all forms of physical performance and rather decreased LM may be more strongly associated with, and possibly responsible for decreases in some physical fitness performance measures. In essence, the study found that for measures of aerobic fitness, FM may be of greater predictive importance than LM and, conversely, for measures of strength and muscular endurance (like bench press, peak power and push-ups), LM may be more important than FM.
There were two exceptions—the sit-up and the vertical jump. Unlike the other measures of muscular endurance, sit-up performance was more strongly correlated with FM than LM, though it should be noted that the negative relationship between sit-up performance and FM did not quite reach the stringent level of statistical significance adopted in this study (Tables 2 and 3). A potential reason for this difference is the distribution of fat mass, with previous research [11] suggesting that an increased sum of skinfolds around the abdomen impacted on sit-up performance but not push-up performance.
The other exception was that of vertical jump height which was significantly correlated with both FM (negative correlation) and LM (positive correlation). A potential reason for this finding is that the nature of the vertical jump requires an element of strength but also the ability to lift the entire body mass off the ground (like running). As such, although the expectation that increased LM would increase performance on this power task held true (ie the increased LM appeared to generate a sufficient increase in leg power to overcome and exceed the additional LM to be lifted), it was also notable, though not unexpected, that increased FM had the opposite effect.
This information is particularly useful in suggesting ways in which performance improvement might be achieved in the law enforcement population. The correlations between lean mass and performance measures were stronger in strength, muscular endurance and power orientated aspects of performance than correlations of those performance measures with fat mass. It may therefore be more effective to intervene with training designed to increase lean muscle mass and muscle strength, endurance and power rather than work primarily to decrease fat mass in order to improve strength, endurance and power related physical fitness performance. Conversely, focusing on decreasing fat mass and increasing metabolic fitness and muscular endurance, rather than increasing lean body mass, may be the most appropriate approach when attempting to increase run times, be they anaerobic or aerobic in requirement. It is important, that other factors that influence performance, like current sport and exercise regime, smoking and diet are likewise considered.
The limited available studies profiling and investigating the anthropometric and fitness characteristics of police officers restricts the ability to compare the findings of this study to results of other studies. However, from the limited studies available, the participants in this study, while of similar ages, were found to be generally lighter (84.45 ± 12.88 kg) than those observed in two separate studies by Boyce et al. (93.2 ± 16.2 kg [22]: 94.6 ± 15.9 kg [23]) and have a lower %BF (16.9 ± 4.6 compared to 19.1 ± 5.9 [22] and 18.5 ± 6.2 % [23] respectively). One of the studies by Boyce et al, [23] reported measures of FM and LM and while the participants in this study had less FM (14.25 ± 7.50 kg versus 18.7 ± 8.5 kg) than participants in the study reported by Boyce et al. [22], they also had less LM (70.21 ± 11.45 kg versus 75.9 ± 9.6 kg). The other study by Boyce et al. [22] included one measure of strength, the bench press, in which their participants recorded slightly higher scores (96.3 ± 20.9 kg) than those observed in this study (93.79 ± 25.91 kg). When considering the %BF and weight of the participants in this latter study by Boyce et al., [22], the higher absolute bench press results align with the findings of this study which indicated a significant and strong correlation between LM and bench press (kg) results.
The data analyzed for this study was retrospective and therefore some data of value was missing. For example, it would have been beneficial to include participant height data in the analyses, but this was unavailable for this cohort. In addition, only three skinfold sites were used, and future research may benefit from the use of 7 skinfold sites [24] to increase skinfold sensitivity and as such the influence of skinfold site measures at specific sites and performance. Finally, the participants in this study were volunteers undertaking a fitness program as such there may be limitations in generalization to the broader population. Considering this, while there is a potential for the data to have excluded the very unfit who may not have wanted to participate in this program, the opposite may be true whereby the very fit would follow their own current fitness regime.
Conclusion
In conclusion, physical performance in law enforcement is critical and anthropometric measurements can be used to guide conditioning interventions to improve performance. This study supports evidence that increasing %BF is associated with decreasing performance. More importantly, this study suggests a targeted approach, going beyond just decreasing %BF to also selectively increasing lean mass, should be applied in efforts to achieve optimal improvement in physical fitness performance. For example, rather than reducing body fat, increasing lean body mass should be the conditioning goal to increase performance in upper-body muscular endurance measures (like push-ups and bench press) and peak power generation. Conversely, decreasing body fat and at the same time improving metabolic fitness and muscular endurance should be the conditioning goal to improve sit-up performance and run times, be they short or longer distance. Increasing lean body mass and decreasing body fat can both positively influence vertical jump performance.
ᅟ
ᅟ
JD: Obtained ethics approval (US), collected and analyzed data and assisted in the preparation of the manuscript. RO: Obtained ethics approval (Australia), assisted in the analysis of the data and edited and finalized the manuscript. CS: Analyzed some components of the data and assisted in the drafting of the manuscript. AV: Analyzed some components of the data and assisted in the drafting of the manuscript. RP: Oversaw and finalized the statistical analysis and interpretation of the data and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
There are no conflicts of interest with this research and all ethical requirements for research have been met. All authors contributed appropriately to the development of this manuscript. This manuscript is original and has not previously published, nor is it being considered elsewhere until a decision is made as to its acceptability by the Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine Editorial Review Board.
- 1. Anderson GS, Plecas D, Segger T. Police officer physical ability testing–Re-validating a selection criterion. Policing Int J Police Strateg Manag 2001;24(1):8–31. 10.1108/13639510110382232.Article
- 2. Arvey RD, Landon TE, Nutting SM, Maxwell SE. Development of physical ability tests for police officers: A construct validation approach. J Appl Psychol 1992;77(6):996. 10.1037/0021-9010.77.6.996. 1468997.ArticlePubMed
- 3. Bissett D, Bissett J, Snell C. Physical agility tests and fitness standards: perceptions of law enforcement officers. Police Pract Res 2012;13(3):208–223. 10.1080/15614263.2011.616142.Article
- 4. https://www.cooperinstitute.org/vault/2440/web/files/684.pdf.
- 5. Pope R, Herbert R, Kirwan JD, Graham BJ. Predicting attrition in basic military training. Mil Med 1999;164(10):710–714. 10544625.ArticlePubMed
- 6. 1st Australian Conference on Physiological and Physical Employment Standards: 2012..
- 7. Ramey SL, Downing NR, Knoblauch A. Developing strategic interventions to reduce cardiovascular disease risk among law enforcement officers the art and science of data triangulation. Am Assoc Occup Health Nurses J 2008;56(2):54–62.
- 8. Ratamess N. Assessment and evaluation. ACSM’s foundations of strength and conditioning. 2012, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 451–488.
- 9. Williford HN, Scharff-Olson M. Fitness and body fat: an issue of performance. Fire Eng 1998;151(8):83–87.
- 10. Ricciardi R, Deuster P, Talbot LA. Effects of Gender and Body Adiposity on physiological responses to physical work while wearing body armor. Mil Med 2007;172(7):743–748. 10.7205/MILMED.172.7.743. 17691688.ArticlePubMed
- 11. Dawes J, Orr RM, Elder C, Rockwell C. Association between body fatness and measures of muscular endurance among part-time swat officers. J Aust Strength Cond 2014;22(4):33–37.
- 12. Frykman PN, Harman E, Pandorf CE. Correlates of obstacle course performance among female soldiers carrying two different loads. RTO meeting proceedings 56: soldier mobility: innovations in load carriage system design and evaluation. 2000, Kingston: Research and Technology Organisation/North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
- 13. Pandorf CE, Harman E, Frykman PN, Patton JF, Mello RP, Nindl BC. Correlates of load carriage and obstacle performance among women. Work 2002;18(2):179–189. 12441582.PubMed
- 14. Jackson AS, Pollock ML. Practical assessment of body composition. Physician Sports Med 1985;113:76–90.Article
- 15. Jackson AS, Pollock ML. Generalized equations for predicting body density of men. Br J Nutr 1978;40(03):497–504. 10.1079/BJN19780152. 718832.ArticlePubMed
- 16. Hoffman R, Collingwood TR. Fit for duty. 2005, Champaign: Human Kinetics.
- 17. Sayers SP, Harackiewicz DV, Harman EA, Frykman PN, Rosenstein MT. Cross-validation of three jump power equations. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999;31(4):572–577. 10.1097/00005768-199904000-00013. 10211854.ArticlePubMed
- 18. Harman EA, Rosenstein MT, Frykman PN, Rosenstein RM, Kraemer WJ. Estimation of human power output from vertical jump. J Strength Cond Res 1991;5(3):116–120.Article
- 19. https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/police/CooperStandards.pdf.
- 20.
- 21. Bland JM, Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995;310(6973):170. 10.1136/bmj.310.6973.170. 7833759.ArticlePubMedPMC
- 22. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/ijahsp/vol12/iss3/10/.
- 23. Boyce R, Jones G, Llyod C, Boone E. A longitudinal observation of police: body composition changes over 12 years with gender and race comparisons. J Exerc Physiol Online 2008;11(6):1–13.
- 24.
References
Figure & Data
REFERENCES
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by 
- Law enforcement recruit fitness: Changes across the fitness spectrum
Danny Maupin, Elisa F.D. Canetti, Ben Schram, Joseph M. Dulla, Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr
Work.2024; : 1. CrossRef - Body Composition and Physical Performance Measures of a Special Operations Police Unit: Characteristics and Associations Between Determinant Factors of Physical Performance
Braian Fink, Tomás T. Freitas, Santiago Zabaloy
Journal of Science in Sport and Exercise.2024; 6(1): 61. CrossRef - Evolution of Physical Training in Police Academies: Comparing Fitness Variables
Bridget Melton, Gregory Ryan, Victor Zuege, Haresh Rochani, Derick Anglin, Joseph Dulla
Healthcare.2023; 11(2): 261. CrossRef - Four-Year Training Course for Police Officers (CFOP) and Fitness Outcomes of Police Academy Cadets: A Cohort Study from 2004 to 2020
Luís Miguel Massuça, Luís Monteiro, Gabriel Coutinho, Vanessa Santos
Healthcare.2023; 11(21): 2901. CrossRef - Relationships Between Physical Fitness Assessment Measures and a Workplace Task-Specific Physical Assessment Among Police Officers: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Robert Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Takato Sakura, Benjamin Schram, Robin M. Orr
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2023; 37(3): 678. CrossRef - Physical Fitness and Psychosocial Profiles of Policewomen from Professional Training Courses and Bodyguard Special Police Sub-Unit
Mariana Carrilho, Vanessa Santos, André Rasteiro, Luís Miguel Massuça
European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education.2023; 13(9): 1880. CrossRef - Body composition and physical performance in under-17 and under-19 rugby players: differences and associations among forwards and backs
Santiago Zabaloy, Javier Gálvez González, Pedro E. Alcaraz, Lucas A. Pereira, Tomás T. Freitas, Irineu Loturco
Movement & Sport Sciences - Science & Motricité.2023; (121): 73. CrossRef - Establishing Reference Data for Fitness Assessment of Law Enforcement Officers Using a Qualitative Systematic Review
Luís Miguel Massuça, Vanessa Santos, Luís Monteiro
Healthcare.2023; 11(9): 1253. CrossRef - Exercise motivations of law enforcement officers in Northeast Louisiana
YuChun Chen, Todd J Castleberry
The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles.2023; 96(2): 289. CrossRef - Longitudinal Changes in Health and Fitness Measures Among State Patrol Officers by Sex
J. Jay Dawes, Marcel Lopes dos Santos, Charles Kornhauser, Ryan J. Holmes, Brent A. Alvar, Robert G. Lockie, Robin M. Orr
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2023; 37(4): 881. CrossRef - Effects of Occupational Load on the Acceleration, Change of Direction Speed, and Anaerobic Power of Police Officers
Filip Kukić, Radivoje Janković, J. Jay Dawes, Robin Orr, Nenad Koropanovski
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2023; 37(6): 1237. CrossRef - Fitness testing at police academies: Optimal fitness for duty
Matthijs Koedijk, R.I. (Vana) Hutter, Peter G. Renden, Lisanne Kleygrewe, Raôul R. D. Oudejans
International Journal of Police Science & Management.2023; 25(2): 170. CrossRef - Accuracy of Body Mass Index and Obesity Status in Police Trainees
Miloš Stojković, Katie M. Heinrich, Aleksandar Čvorović, Velimir Jeknić, Gianpiero Greco, Filip Kukić
European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education.2022; 12(1): 42. CrossRef - Do baseline physical fitness measures predict law enforcement academy graduation?
Daniel Marks, Justin J. Merrigan, Joel Martin
Work.2022; 72(1): 263. CrossRef - Changes in body composition and physical performance measures during a regular competitive season among young backs and forwards rugby players
Santiago Zabaloy, Javier Gálvez González, Julián Giráldez, Braian Fink, Pedro E. Alcaraz, Lucas Pereira, Irineu Loturco, Tomás T. Freitas
Sports Biomechanics.2022; : 1. CrossRef - Association of shorter and longer distance sprint running to change of direction speed in police students
Aspen Streetman, Darko Paspalj, Nemanja Zlojutro, Danijel Božić, Jay Dawes, Filip Kukić
Nauka, bezbednost, policija.2022; 27(1): 5. CrossRef - Strength Deficit in Elite Young Rugby Players: Differences Between Playing Positions and Associations With Sprint and Jump Performance
Santiago Zabaloy, Julián Giráldez, Braian Fink, Pedro E. Alcaraz, Lucas A. Pereira, Tomás T. Freitas, Irineu Loturco
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2022; 36(4): 920. CrossRef - Relationships Between Tests of Strength, Power, and Speed and the 75-Yard Pursuit Run
Brett K. Post, J. Jay Dawes, Robert G. Lockie
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2022; 36(1): 99. CrossRef - The effects of a 6-month mandatory military police academy training on recruits’ physical fitness
Wélere G. Barbosa, Daniel R. Saint Martin, Edgard de Melo Keene von Koenig Soares Soares, Keila Elizabeth Fontana, Fan-Yun Lan, Stefanos N. Kales, Guilherme E. Molina, Luiz Guilherme G. Porto
Work.2022; 73(4): 1297. CrossRef - Upper body push to pull ratios in law enforcement officer recruits
Justin J. Merrigan, Adam A. Burke, Oladipo O. Eddo, James Kearney, Daniel Marks, Joel R. Martin
Work.2022; 73(4): 1167. CrossRef - Body Composition and Physical Activity of Female Police Officers: Do Occupation and Age Matter?
Filip Kukić, Katie M. Heinrich, Nenad Koropanovski, Gianpiero Greco, Stefania Cataldi, Milivoj Dopsaj
Sustainability.2022; 14(17): 10589. CrossRef - Association of waist to height ratio with 2.4 kilometers running time among male police populations
Aleksandar Čvorović, Filip Kukić, Katie M. Heinrich, Milivoj Dopsaj
Work.2022; 71(4): 1097. CrossRef - Profiling the New Zealand Police Trainee Physical Competency Test
J. Jay Dawes, Jordan Scott, Elisa F. D. Canetti, Robert G. Lockie, Ben Schram, Robin M. Orr
Frontiers in Public Health.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - Factorial and Construct Validity of Sit-Up Test of Different Durations to Assess Muscular Endurance of Police Students
Filip Kukić, Robin Orr, Milan Marković, J. Jay Dawes, Aleksandar Čvorović, Nenad Koropanovski
Sustainability.2022; 14(20): 13630. CrossRef - RELATIONSHIP OF TOTAL ENDURANCE ON JOB PERFORMANCE IN EDUCATIONAL SECTORS
Muhammad Saad Shafiq, Ibraheem Zafar, Nimrah Butt, Ramsha Masood, Zurwa Amir
Pakistan BioMedical Journal.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - Editorial of Special Issue “Body Image Perception and Body Composition in Different Populations: The Role of Physical Education and Sport”
Gianpiero Greco
European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education.2022; 12(11): 1700. CrossRef - Body Composition and Fitness Characteristics of Firefighters Participating in a Health and Wellness Program: Relationships and Descriptive Data
Robert G. Lockie, Joseph M. Dulla, Daniel Higuera, Kristina A. Ross, Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes, Tomas J. Ruvalcaba
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(23): 15758. CrossRef - Identifying the Physical Fitness and Health Evaluations for Police Officers: Brief Systematic Review with an Emphasis on the Portuguese Research
Luís M. Massuça, Vanessa Santos, Luís F. Monteiro
Biology.2022; 11(7): 1061. CrossRef - The 20-m Multistage Fitness Test and 2.4-km Run: Applications to Law Enforcement Fitness Assessment
Robert G. Lockie, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes
Strength & Conditioning Journal.2021; 43(6): 68. CrossRef - Aerobic endurance levels as model control tools for individual prototypical training progres among algerian soccer players
Mohammed Zerf, Mime Mokhtar, Mohammed Hadjar Kherfane, Belkadi Adel, Wahib Beboucha
Journal of Kinesiology and Exercise Sciences.2021; 31(94): 31. CrossRef - Associations Between Two Measures of Trunk Muscular Endurance Among Male Law Enforcement Officers
J. Jay Dawes, Cody A. Stahl, Robert G. Lockie, Jan E. Redmond, Charles L. Kornhauser, Ryan J. Holmes, Robin M. Orr
Journal of Science in Sport and Exercise.2021; 3(4): 374. CrossRef - Occupational Challenges to the Development and Maintenance of Physical Fitness Within Law Enforcement Officers
Tim Lentine, Quincy Johnson, Robert Lockie, Jill Joyce, Rob Orr, Jay Dawes
Strength & Conditioning Journal.2021; 43(6): 115. CrossRef - With great power comes great ability: Extending research on fitness characteristics that influence work sample test battery performance in law enforcement recruits
Robert G. Lockie, Matthew R. Moreno, Karly A. Rodas, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes
Work.2021; 68(4): 1069. CrossRef - Relationship Between the 20-m Multistage Fitness Test and 2.4-km Run in Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Matthew R. Moreno, Karly A. Cesario, Katherine Balfany, Michael Stierli, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2021; 35(10): 2756. CrossRef - Effects of Sex and Age on Physical Testing Performance for Law Enforcement Agency Candidates: Implications for Academy Training
Ashley M. Bloodgood, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Michael Stierli, Karly A. Cesario, Matthew R. Moreno, Joseph M. Dulla, Robert G. Lockie
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2021; 35(9): 2629. CrossRef - Impact of a 12-Week Postgraduate Training Course on the Body Composition and Physical Abilities of Police Trainees
Aleksandar Čvorović, Filip Kukić, Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes, Velimir Jeknić, Miloš Stojković
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2021; 35(3): 826. CrossRef - A Preliminary Investigation: Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Occupational Specific Training Program to Improve Lower Body Strength and Speed for Law Enforcement Officers
Ian Bonder, Andrew Shim, Robert G. Lockie, Tara Ruppert
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2021; 18(14): 7685. CrossRef - Importance of Ability-Based Training for Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert Lockie, Joseph Dulla, Robin Orr, Jay Dawes
Strength & Conditioning Journal.2021; 43(3): 80. CrossRef - Profiling the New Zealand police physical appraisal test
Robin Marc Orr, Elisa Canetti, Jason Movshovich, Robert Lockie, Jay Dawes, Ben Schram
International Journal of Emergency Services.2021; 10(2): 266. CrossRef - Physical fitness: Differences between initial hiring to academy in law enforcement recruits who graduate or separate from academy
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Joseph M. Dulla
Work.2021; 68(4): 1081. CrossRef - Skeletal Muscle Mass and Fat Mass Relationships With Physical Fitness Test Performance in Law Enforcement Recruits Before Academy
Robert G. Lockie, Blake N. Carlock, Tomas J. Ruvalcaba, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes, Megan B. McGuire
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2021; 35(5): 1287. CrossRef - Impact of a Season of Bike Patrol on Police Officers’ Level of Fitness: A Pilot Study
Frédérique Lehouillier, Marc-Olivier Dugas, Martin Lavallière
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2021; 18(12): 6214. CrossRef - Strength and Conditioning Program Design Considerations for Law Enforcement Officers
Jay Dawes, Tim Lentine, Quincy Johnson, Robert Lockie, Rob Orr
Strength & Conditioning Journal.2021; 43(6): 110. CrossRef - Waist Circumference and Waist-to-Hip Ratio in Law Enforcement Agency Recruits: Relationship to Performance in Physical Fitness Tests
Robert G. Lockie, Tomas R. Ruvalcaba, Michael Stierli, Joseph M. Dulla, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2020; 34(6): 1666. CrossRef - Perceived and Measured Physical Fitness of Police Students
Filip Kukić, Robert G. Lockie, Ana Vesković, Nikola Petrović, Dane Subošić, Danijela Spasić, Darko Paspalj, Lazar Vulin, Nenad Koropanovski
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(20): 7628. CrossRef - Law enforcement personnel are willing to change, but report influencing beliefs and barriers to optimised dietary intake
Kristen MacKenzie-Shalders, Charlene Matthews, Joe Dulla, Robin Orr
BMC Public Health.2020;[Epub] CrossRef - Differences in Body Composition across Police Occupations and Moderation Effects of Leisure Time Physical Activity
Filip Kukić, Katie M. Heinrich, Nenad Koropanovski, Walker S. C. Poston, Aleksandar Čvorović, J. Jay Dawes, Robin Orr, Milivoj Dopsaj
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(18): 6825. CrossRef - Association between Body Fat Percentage and Physical Performance in Male Korean Police Officers
Jooyoung Kim, Wi-Young So, Sangwoon Kim
Sustainability.2020; 12(9): 3868. CrossRef - Special Weapons and Tactics Occupational-Specific Physical Assessments and Fitness Measures
Jessica Strader, Ben Schram, Shane Irving, Jeremy Robinson, Robin Orr
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(21): 8070. CrossRef - Recruit Fitness Standards From a Large Law Enforcement Agency: Between-Class Comparisons, Percentile Rankings, and Implications for Physical Training
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Joseph M. Dulla
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2020; 34(4): 934. CrossRef - Relationship of Anthropometric Measures on Female Trainees’ and Active Duty Soldiers’ Performance of Common Soldiering Tasks
Jan E Redmond, Bruce S Cohen, Caitlin C Haven, Joseph R Pierce, Stephen A Foulis, Peter N Frykman, Maria C Canino, Marilyn A Sharp
Military Medicine.2020; 185(Supplement): 376. CrossRef - Relations Between Frequency and Volume of Leisure-Time Physical Activity and Body Composition in Police Officers
Marko Vuković, Filip Kukić, Aleksandar Čvorović, Dunja Janković, Iva Prćić, Milivoj Dopsaj
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport.2020; 91(1): 47. CrossRef - Physical Fitness, Sex Considerations, and Academy Graduation for Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr, Erika Hernandez
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2020; 34(12): 3356. CrossRef - Accuracy of body mass index based on self-report data among law enforcement cadets
Quincy Johnson, Jillian Joyce, Filip Kukić, Robert Lockie, Charles Kornhauser, Robin Orr, Dawes Jay
Nauka bezbednost policija.2020; 25(2): 1. CrossRef - POLİS ALIMLARINDA FİZİKSEL UYGUNLUK TESTLERİ: AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ VE TÜRKİYE UYGULAMALARI
Mustafa KARATAŞ
Güvenlik Bilimleri Dergisi.2020; 9(2): 343. CrossRef - We Need You: Influence of Hiring Demand and Modified Applicant Testing on the Physical Fitness of Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Matthew R. Moreno, Megan B. McGuire, Tomas J. Ruvalcaba, Ashley M. Bloodgood, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(20): 7512. CrossRef - Cross-Sectional and Retrospective Cohort Analysis of the Effects of Age on Flexibility, Strength Endurance, Lower-Body Power, and Aerobic Fitness in Law Enforcement Officers
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Charles L. Kornhauser, Ryan J. Holmes
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2019; 33(2): 451. CrossRef - The effects of aerobic fitness on day one physical training session completion in law enforcement recruits
Robert G. Lockie, Matthew R. Moreno, Karly A. Cesario, Megan B. McGuire, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Joseph M. Dulla.
Journal of Trainology.2019; 8(1): 1. CrossRef - The Influence of Physical Fitness on Reasons for Academy Separation in Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, Katherine Balfany, Ashley M. Bloodgood, Matthew R. Moreno, Karly A. Cesario, Joseph M. Dulla, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2019; 16(3): 372. CrossRef - Time Spent Working in Custody Influences Work Sample Test Battery Performance of Deputy Sheriffs Compared to Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, Robin M. Orr, Matthew R. Moreno, J. Jay Dawes, Joseph M. Dulla
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2019; 16(7): 1108. CrossRef - Characterization of the Physical Fitness of Police Officers: A Systematic Review
Eduardo F. Marins, Gabriela B. David, Fabrício B. Del Vecchio
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2019; 33(10): 2860. CrossRef - Comparing levels of fitness of police Officers between two United States law enforcement agencies
Cory J. Myers, Robin M. Orr, Kiyoshi S. Goad, Benjamin L. Schram, Robert Lockie, Charlie Kornhauser, Ryan Holmes, J. Jay Dawes, Gemma S. Milligan, Sam D. Blacker, Pieter E.H. Brown, Andrew G. Siddall
Work.2019; 63(4): 615. CrossRef - Recruit fitness and police academy performance: a prospective validation study
M Korre, K Loh, E J Eshleman, F S Lessa, L G Porto, C A Christophi, S N Kales
Occupational Medicine.2019;[Epub] CrossRef - Physical Characteristics by Sex and Age for Custody Assistants From a Law Enforcement Agency
Robert G. Lockie, Robin M. Orr, Michael Stierli, Karly A. Cesario, Matthew R. Moreno, Ashley M. Bloodgood, Joseph M. Dulla, J. Jay Dawes
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2019; 33(8): 2223. CrossRef - VO2max levels as a pointer of physiological training status among soccer players
Zerf Mohammed, Boras Fatima Zohar, Benali Gourar, Bengoua Ali, Mokkedes Moulay Idriss
Acta Facultatis Educationis Physicae Universitatis Comenianae.2018; 58(2): 112. CrossRef - Levels of aerobic fitness as an unfair parameter in Algerian football training programs
Mohammed ZERF, Ali BENGOUA, Mokkedes MOULAY IDRİSS
Turkish Journal of Kinesiology.2018; 4(4): 113. CrossRef - Assessing Differences in Anthropometric and Fitness Characteristics Between Police Academy Cadets and Incumbent Officers
Robin M. Orr, J. Jay Dawes, Rodney Pope, Joseph Terry
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2018; 32(9): 2632. CrossRef - Analysis of the Effects of Sex and Age on Upper- and Lower-Body Power for Law Enforcement Agency Recruits Before Academy Training
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Michael Stierli, Joseph M. Dulla, Ashley J. Orjalo
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2018; 32(7): 1968. CrossRef - Physical Fitness Characteristics That Relate to Work Sample Test Battery Performance in Law Enforcement Recruits
Robert G. Lockie, J. Jay Dawes, Katherine Balfany, Ciara E. Gonzales, Maria M. Beitzel, Joseph M. Dulla, Robin M. Orr
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2018; 15(11): 2477. CrossRef - A brief review of body composition in police workforce
Filip Kukic, Milivoj Dopsaj, Aleksandar Cvorovic, Milos Stojkovic, Velimir Jeknic
International Journal of Physical Education, Fitness and Sports.2018; 7(2): 10. CrossRef - Are there similarities in physical fitness characteristics of successful candidates attending law enforcement training regardless of training cohort?
Robert G. Lockie, Michael Stierli, Jay Dawes J., Karly A. Cesario, Matthew R. Moreno, Ashley M. Bloodgood, Robin M. Orr, Joseph M. Dulla
Journal of Trainology.2018; 7(1): 5. CrossRef - Physical Fitness Characteristics of High vs. Low Performers on an Occupationally Specific Physical Agility Test for Patrol Officers
J. Jay Dawes, Keston Lindsay, Jennifer Bero, Craig Elder, Charlie Kornhauser, Ryan Holmes
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.2017; 31(10): 2808. CrossRef - A physical fitness profile of state highway patrol officers by gender and age
J. Jay Dawes, Robin M. Orr, Richard R. Flores, Robert G. Lockie, Charlie Kornhauser, Ryan Holmes
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.2017;[Epub] CrossRef
PubReader
ePub Link
Cite
XML DownloadAssociations between anthropometric characteristics and physical performance in male law enforcement officers: a retrospective cohort study
Associations between anthropometric characteristics and physical performance in male law enforcement officers: a retrospective cohort study
| Measure | Cohort Mean ± SD | ‘Average’ and below groupb Mean ± SD | ‘Above average’ groupb Mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| n = 76 | n = 31 | n = 45 | |
| Weight (kg) | 84.45 ± 12.80 | 82.82 ± 13.40 | 85.58 ± 12.40 |
| Chest skinfold (mm) | 13.74 ± 5.52 | 8.77 ± 3.54 | 17.16 ± 3.77a |
| Abdominal skinfold (mm) | 24.57 ± 8.85 | 17.74 ± 6.52 | 29.27 ± 7.00a |
| Thigh skinfold (mm) | 12.72 ± 4.99 | 10.19 ± 3.26 | 14.47 ± 5.25a |
| Sum of skinfolds (mm) | 51.01 ± 14.56 | 36.71 ± 9.03 | 60.87 ± 7.88a |
| Estimated body fat (%) | 16.89 ± 4.60 | 12.40 ± 3.21 | 19.98 ± 2.25a |
| Estimated lean mass (kg) | 70.21 ± 11.45 | 72.71 ± 12.82 | 68.48 ± 10.20 |
| Estimated fat mass (kg) | 14.24 ± 4.50 | 10.11 ± 2.66 | 17.09 ± 3.06a |
| Push-ups (reps) | 55.58 ± 17.35 | 64.39 ± 16.39 | 49.51 ± 15.43a |
| Sit-ups (reps) | 41.05 ± 6.96 | 43.51 ± 6.34 | 39.32 ± 6.92 |
| Vertical jump height (cm) | 61.26 ± 7.96 | 65.75 ± 7.55 | 58.17 ± 6.71a |
| Estimated peak power (w) | 5478.38 ± 829.96 | 5661.33 ± 828.93 | 5352.34 ± 815.99 |
| Bench press (kg) | 93.79 ± 25.91 | 102.21 ± 27.16 | 88.00 ± 23.60 |
| Bench press ratio (BPR) | 1.10 ± 0.23 | 1.22 ± 0.23 | 1.02 ± 0.18a |
| 300 m (secs) | 56.03 ± 10.67 | 52.96 ± 6.26 | 58.15 ± 12.49 |
| 1.5 mile run (min:secs) | 12.75 ± 2.30 | 11.86 ± 1.47 | 13.37 ± 2.57 |
| Estimated VO2 max (ml.kg.min.-1) | 41.31 ± 6.50 | 43.96 ± 4.36 | 39.49 ± 7.12 |
| Age | %BF groups | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Measure | F value and Sig | F value and Sig |
| 76 | Push-ups (reps) | F (1,73) = 0.282, p = .597 | F (1,73) = 15.113, p < .001a |
| 76 | Sit-ups (reps) | F (1,73) = 3.100, p = .083 | F (1,73) = 8.674, p = .004 |
| 76 | Vertical jump height (cm) | F (1,73) = 10.299, p = .002 | F (1,73) = 19.018, p < .001a |
| 76 | Estimated peak power (w) | F (1,73) = 1.536, p = .219 | F (1,73) = 2.013, p = .160 |
| 76 | Bench press (kg) | F (1,73) = 0.243, p = 0.623 | F (1,73) = 5.354, p = .023 |
| 76 | Bench press ratio (BPR) | F (1,73) = 1.339, p = 0.251 | F (1,73) = 17.119, p < .001a |
| 75 | 300 m (secs) | F (1,73) = 2.067, p = .155 | F (1,73) = 3.661, p = .060 |
| 76 | 1.5 mile run (min:secs) | F (1,73) = 3.121, p = .081 | F (1,73) = 7.270, p = .009 |
| 76 | Estimated VO2max (ml.kg.min.-1) | F (1,73) = 1.755, p = .189 | F (1,73) = 8.388, p = .005 |
| Fitness and anthropometric information | %BF | LM (kg) | FM (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push-ups (reps) | −.413a | .444a | −.210 |
| Sit-ups (reps) | −.198 | −.177 | −.308 |
| Vertical jump height (cm) | −.566a | .391a | −.369a |
| Estimated peak power (w) | −.343 | .879a | .107 |
| Bench press (kg) | −.327 | .781a | .073 |
| Bench press ratio (BPR) | −.448a | .392a | −.241 |
| 300 m (secs) | .244 | .049 | .290 |
| 1.5 mile run (min:secs) | .285 | .181 | .399a |
| Estimated VO2 Max.(ml.kg.min.-1) | −.287 | −.214 | −.419a |
Table 1 Descriptive information for full-time officers as a cohort and by %BF groupings
aSignificant difference between groups, with
bGroups: i) ‘Average and below’ included participants with a %BF of 15.0 % and below for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and 17.0 % and below for males up to 50 years of age, and ii) ‘Above average’ included participants with a %BF above 15.0 % for males up to the age of 30 years of age, and above 17.0 % for males up to 50 years of age [
Table 2 ANCOVA results between groups with age as the covariate
asignificant difference at
Table 3 Correlations between anthropometric measures and fitness scores
aCorrelation is significant with
