Article Text

Download PDFPDF
External workload and cognitive performance of a tactical military scenario-based field exercise
  1. Faye S Walker1,
  2. S C Needham-Beck1,
  3. C A J Vine1,
  4. S D Blacker1,
  5. I Greenlees1,2,
  6. B T Sharpe1,
  7. A G Siddall1,3,
  8. T Maroni1,
  9. K M Ashdown1,
  10. K L Hinde3,
  11. E Elliott3,
  12. M Rayson4,
  13. E Knight5 and
  14. S D Myers1
  1. 1Centre of Health and Applied Sport and Exercise Research, University of Chichester, Chichester, West Sussex, UK
  2. 2The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
  3. 3Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
  4. 4Human Social Science Research Capability (HSSRC), BAE Systems Plc, London, UK
  5. 5Cervus Defence and Security Ltd, Bristol, UK
  1. Correspondence to Faye S Walker, Centre of Health and Applied Sport and Exercise Research, University of Chichester, Chichester, PO19 1SB, UK; f.walker{at}chi.ac.uk

Abstract

Introduction Military personnel must manage a multitude of competing physiological and cognitive stressors while maintaining high levels of performance. Quantifying the external workload and cognitive demands of tactical military field exercises closely simulating operational environments, will provide a better understanding of stressors placed on personnel to inform evidence-based interventions.

Methods Thirty-one soldiers completing a dismounted 48 hours tactical field exercise, participated in the study. External workload was quantified using a wrist-worn triaxial accelerometer, with cognitive function (Go-/No-Go, N-back, psychomotor vigilance task and subjective workload ratings (NASA-TLX) assessed pre-exercise, mid-exercise and postexercise. Physical activity was described using Euclidian Norm Minus One (mg), with moderate vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary light physical activity (SLPA) as ≥ or <113 mg, respectively. Changes in general cognitive performance (total accuracy-speed trade-off (ASTO) % change) and function outcome variables (overall mean reaction time, ASTO and number of correct and missed responses) were calculated for each assessment from pre-exercise, to mid-exercise and postexercise.

Results For the exercise duration (50:12±02:06 hh:mm) participants spent more time completing SLPA compared with MVPA (1932±234 vs 1074±194 min; p<0.001), equating to 33% of the time spent completing MVPA. Overall cognitive performance decreased over the exercise (pre-to-post: −249). However, the largest decrement was observed pre-to-mid (−168). Perceived mental demand associated with the cognitive assessments significantly increased over the duration of the exercise (pre-: 33; mid-: 38 and post-: 51; χ2F(2) = 26.7, p = <0.001, W=0.477) which could suggest that participants were able to attenuate a further decline in cognitive performance by investing more effort/mental resources when completing assessments.

Conclusion The study successfully quantified the physical activity, and subsequent impact on cognitive function, in soldiers completing a 48 hours tactical field exercise. Further research is needed to better understand how physiological stressors interact with cognitive function during military operations.

  • SPORTS MEDICINE
  • OCCUPATIONAL & INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE
  • Physiology

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors FSW: Guarantor, data collection, data analysis and writing; SCNB: Conceptualisation, data collection, data analysis and writing; CAJV: Data analysis and writing; SDB: Conceptualisation, data analysis and writing; IG: Conceptualisation, data analysis and writing; BTS: Data analysis and writing; AGS: Conceptualisation, data collection, data analysis and writing; TM: Data collection; KMA: Data collection; KH: Conceptualisation, data collection, data analysis and writing; EE: Conceptualisation; MR: Conceptualisation and writing; EK: Data analysis; SDM: Conceptualisation, data analysis and writing.

  • Funding This study was funded by Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (N/A).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.