These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effects of an Experimental vs. Traditional Military Training Program on 2-Mile Run Performance During the Army Physical Fitness Test.
    Author: Stone BL, Heishman AD, Campbell JA.
    Journal: J Strength Cond Res; 2020 Dec; 34(12):3431-3438. PubMed ID: 33235017.
    Abstract:
    Stone, BL, Heishman, AD, and Campbell, JA. The effects of an experimental vs. traditional military training program on 2-mile run performance during the army physical fitness test. J Strength Cond Res 34(12): 3431-3438, 2020-The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of an experimental vs. traditional military run training on 2-mile run ability in the Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets. Fifty college-aged cadets were randomly placed into 2 groups and trained for 4 weeks with either an experimental running program (EXP, n = 22) comprised rating of perceived exertion (RPE) intensity-specific, energy system-based intervals or with traditional military running program (TRA, n = 28) using a crossover study design. A 2-mile run assessment was performed just before the start, at the end of the first 4 weeks, and again after the second 4 weeks of training after crossover. The EXP program significantly decreased 2-mile run times (961.3 ± 155.8 seconds to 943.4 ± 140.2 seconds, p = 0.012, baseline to post 1), whereas the TRA group experienced a significant increase in run times (901.0 ± 79.2 vs. 913.9 ± 82.9 seconds) over the same training period. There was a moderate effect size (d = 0.61, p = 0.07) for the experimental run program to "reverse" the adverse effects of the traditional program within the 4-week training period (post 1 to post 2) after treatment crossover. Thus, for short-term training of military personnel, RPE intensity-specific running program comprising aerobic and anaerobic system development can enhance 2-mile run performance superior to a traditional program while reducing training volume (60 minutes per session vs. 43.2 minutes per session, respectively). Future research should extend the training period to determine efficacy of this training approach for long-term improvement of aerobic capacity and possible reduction of musculoskeletal injury.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]