(28) METABOLIC PERFORMANCE CHANGES COMPARISON FOR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT FOR FIREFIGHTING GEAR, EXPLOSIVE ORDINANCE DISPOSAL GEAR, AND POLICE GEAR

Introduction: Personal protective equipment (PPE) increases metabolic demands for professionals. There is very little research investigating the metabolic demands of wearing explosive ordinance disposal (EOD) equipment, however, there is a great deal of research on the demands of firefighting equipment and police equipment. How these demands compare between the different PPE needs to be investigated.

Purpose: To compare metabolic demands between wearing firefighting PPE, EOD PPE, and police PPE.

Methods: 17 recreationally trained college aged students (weight 88.5±15.6 kg, age 23±4.8, 12 male and 5 female, height 1.76±.07m, Body Fat Percentage 20.5±10.1%, Mean±SD) participated in this study. Subjects came in for 4 testing visits. PPE was donned in the testing visits after the initial familiarization visit, the options were firefighting PPE (turnout clothes, SCBA, Helmet), EOD PPE, and police PPE (tactical vest and duty belt with typical weight loadout).  Subjects performed a Bruce treadmill protocol, during the FAM visit subjects completed a standard VO2 max protocol (Bruce) on the treadmill. Subjects completed a modified Bruce protocol during the PPE visits (stages 1-3). Metabolic measurements were recorded during each stage of the test. Subjects self-reported their ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during each stage. PPE order was randomized. Metabolic data was analyzed for the time point of inflection of ventilation rate was determined as the ventilatory anaerobic threshold (VAT). Data was then analyzed for changes in performance between the different PPE and the familiarization visit utilizing ANOVA with LSD post hoc testing, significance was set at p < .05.

Results: Heart rate and VO2 were significantly higher in a number of stages in the EOD equipment compared to the firefighting gear.  EOD PPE and firefighting PPE we significantly more metabolically demanding than the familiarization visit for all metabolic metrics. The police gear was only significantly different than the familiarization in VAT.

Conclusions: The bomb suit had greater metabolic demands and was perceived as the more difficult load carriage than the firefighting gear. The difference though significant do show relatively similar responses to performance when wearing either equipment compared to unencumbered performance. The police equipment was markedly easier and had a minimal detrimental effect on performance compared to the familiarization performance.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Individuals that work with individuals that need to wear EOD equipment should understand that bomb disposal equipment is more demanding than firefighting gear and in turn program for the physical development of their clients appropriately. Police gear does influence performance but to nowhere near as great of a degree as the other equipment.

Acknowledgements: None