Title: Influence of 16-Week Fire Training Academy on Movement Efficiency in Firefighter Cadet and General Population Recruits
Name: Andrew Telschow
Primary Presenters: Andrew Telschow, Joe Roehrkasse, Ryan Smilanich
College of Health Sciences
Clinical Doctorate
Faculty Sponsor(s): Dr. Kyle Ebersole
Influence of 16-Week Fire Training Academy on Movement Efficiency in Firefighter Cadet and General Population Recruits
Background/Rationale
The City of Milwaukee Fire Department has two recruit types: graduates from the two-year Cadet program (CR) and those selected from the general population application list (GR). Research has demonstrated links between musculoskeletal injury risk and movement ability. It is possible that CRs move differently than GRs, and, therefore, have different injury prevention needs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of a 16-week fire training academy on movement efficiency in both CR and GR firefighter recruits.
Methods
The Fusionetics™ Movement Efficiency Screen (MES) was used to represent movement efficiency among 142 firefighter recruits (122 male, 20 female). The total number of movement impairments (MI) was calculated for each participant as well. Differences (CR vs. GR) in overall MES and MI between pre- and post-academy were examined using a one-way ANOVA (Group x Time). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Results
For MES, the Group x Test interaction was not significant. Follow-up tests indicated that CR had a significantly higher MES (72.2±14.4) than GR (68.1±15.1). When averaged across groups, the post-MES (75.4±14.2) was significantly greater than the pre-MES (65.8±13.9). For total MI, the Group x Test interaction was not significant. Follow-up tests indicated that CR had significantly fewer total MI (8.3±4.1) than GR (9.74 ± 4.7). When averaged across groups, the post-total MI (7.9±4.1) was significantly lower than the pre-total MI (9.9 ± 4.5).
Conclusions
The 16-week firefighter training program resulted in similar decreases in total MI and improvement in MES for both firefighter CR and GR. The CR group showed overall better MI scores. This data suggests that a cadet program may be linked to improved movement efficiency and fewer impairments, thus lowering risk of injury.
https://sites.uwm.edu/healthresearchsymposium/files/formidable/2/References-List.pdf
Interesting that they both showed improvement. I guess that speaks to the quality of the 16 week program. At first I was wondering if maybe the pre-tests would give some information that would allow better “tailoring” of the conditioning program. But then you reported that both groups improved with the current program, so I was left thinking, “Why fix something that seems to be working well?”. I agree, it would be interesting to see if there is a difference in the injury rate or severity in these two groups.
Really interesting stuff, cool to see the clear benefit in squat optimization over the 16-week program. Any idea what a typical week of training looks like in this program? Also, why do you suppose the cadets had fewer impairments after the program then the general population- maybe something like differences in the ages of the two groups?
Andrew, Joe and Ryan – great job! It would be interesting to know if 16 weeks is necessary to see the benefits. Were any data collected throughout the 16-week training to look at the change curve? I agree with Dr. Miller’s comment (and in your presentation) that it would be interesting to see if this difference leads to decreased injury.
This was very well done boys! Not only is the topic very interesting but I thought you guys created a poster that displayed the information in an interesting and effective way. I thought it was great how you concluded with the clinical relevance of this research and it sounds like the program is beneficial not only for the participants as it decreases risk of injury, but it also can minimize healthcare costs which is great too. In regards to your poster, the organization was really effective as my eyes were initially drawn to the graphs and pictures which demonstrates your results. You also used just enough text to describe the study but not enough to overwhelm the viewer. Nicely done!