Quantifying Training Load During Physically Demanding Tasks in U.S. Army Soldiers: A Comparison of Physiological and Psychological Measurements.

Introduction There are many ways to quantify the training loads required to perform soldiering tasks. Although indirect calorimetry may provide the most accurate measures, the equipment can be burdensome and expensive. Simpler measures may provide sufficient data, while being more practical for measuring soldiers in the field. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between total relative oxygen uptake (TotalRelVO(2)) measured by indirect calorimetry during three soldiering tasks, with two field-expedient measures of training load: summated heart rate zone (sumHR) and session rate of perceived exertion (sRPE). Materials and Methods 33 male and 28 female soldiers performed three soldiering tasks while wearing a 32.3-kg fighting load: sandbag fill, sandbag carry, and ammunition can carry. Metabolic measurements were monitored and completion times were recorded (min). TotalRelVO(2) (average relative VO2*time) and age-predicted maximal heart rate (220-age) were calculated. SumHR was calculated by multiplying time spent in each of the five heart rate zones by a multiplier factor for each zone (50-59% = 1, 60-69% = 2, 70-79% = 3, 80-89% = 4, and >= 90% = 5). RPE (Borg 6-20 scale) was collected at the end of each task, then sRPE was calculated (RPE* time). Pearson and Spearman correlations were performed to examine the relationship between TotalRelVO(2), sumHR and sRPE. Wilcoxon signed rank tests were conducted to determine if there was a difference in median rankings between the three variables for each task. Linear regressions were performed to determine predictability of TotalRelVO(2) from sumHR and sRPE. The study was approved by the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine Institutional Review Board. Results Significant, positive correlations were revealed for all three tasks between TotalRelVO(2), sumHR and sRPE (r >= 0.67, p <= 0.01; rho >= 0.74, p <= 0.01). Wilcoxon signed rank tests revealed no significant differences in rankings between TotalRelVO(2), sumHR and sRPE for all three tasks (p >= 0.43). Both sumHR and sRPE are significant predictors of TotalRelVO(2) (p = 0.01). Conclusions SumHR and sRPE are acceptable alternatives to TotalRelVO(2) when attempting to quantify and/or monitor training load during soldiering tasks.