Are young military personnel at a disproportional risk of heat illness?

Heat illnesses (HI) define a continuum of conditions where patients become incapacitated due to uncompensable heat stress. In the military, HI has a significant health, financial and operational burden that requires vigilant management. Military training and operations regularly expose personnel to known HI risk factors, meaning that prevalence remains high despite stringent attempts to reduce risk to as low as reasonably practicable. While prepubertal children and elderly adults are widely demonstrated to be at greater risk of classic HI than young adults due to impaired physiological and/or behavioural thermoregulation, in military personnel, it is young recruit-age individuals (16-19 years) who consistently experience the highest prevalence of exertional HI. Mechanistically, controlled laboratory studies have never directly compared thermoregulation between young recruit-age individuals and other groups of adults, though research highlighting impaired thermoregulation in prepubertal children potentially has some relevance to late-developing young recruit-age personnel. Aside from potential age-related differences in thermoregulation, a major consideration must also be given to the increased prevalence of organisational risk factors for HI in younger military personnel (eg, education, physical load, rank, job roles), which is likely to be the primary explanation behind age-related trends in HI prevalence, at least in the military. The aims of this article are to review: (i) the epidemiology of HI between young recruit-age individuals and older military personnel; (ii) the theoretical basis for age-associated differences in thermoregulatory function and (iii) pertinent areas for future research.

Understanding the musculoskeletal injury risk of women in combat: the effect of infantry training and sex on musculoskeletal injury incidence during British Army basic training

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, women were excluded from British combat roles. Their risk for musculoskeletal injury during basic training is two to three times higher than men. To better understand the musculoskeletal injury risk of women in British Army infantry basic training, we compared injury incidence between (1) men in standard entry training and men in infantry training, to assess the risk of infantry training; and (2) men and women in both standard entry and officer basic training, to assess the risk in women compared with men.

METHODS

The incidence of musculoskeletal injury was determined from defence medical records for all men entering infantry training, and for all men and women entering standard entry and officer training, between April 2015 and March 2016.

RESULTS

7390 men (standard entry, n=4229; infantry, n=2683; officer, n=478) and 696 women (standard entry, n=626; officer, n=70) entered basic training. Men in infantry training had a lower incidence of musculoskeletal injury (391 vs 417 per 1000 personnel, OR 0.90 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.99), p=0.028) and a higher incidence of stress fracture (14 vs 5 per 1000 personnel, OR 2.80 (95% CI 1.64 to 4.80), p<0.001) than men in standard entry training. Women had a higher incidence of musculoskeletal injury than men in standard entry training (522 vs 417 per 1000 personnel, OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.81), p<0.001) and a higher incidence of stress fracture than men in officer training (114 vs 19 per 1000 personnel, OR 6.72 (95% CI 2.50 to 18.07), p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Women in infantry training may be at similar risk for musculoskeletal injury, but at higher risk for stress fracture, compared with their non-infantry counterparts. Women in infantry training may be at higher risk for musculoskeletal injury and stress fracture compared with men in infantry training.

Evaluation of the current methods used for assessing dietary intake in military research settings: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

It is important to collate the literature that has assessed dietary intake within military settings to establish which methods are commonly used and which are valid so that accurate nutrition recommendations can be made. This scoping review aims to identify which methods are typically used to assess dietary intake in military settings and which of these have been validated. This review also aims to provide a recommendation as to which method(s) should be used in military settings.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus with the most recent search executed on 12th June 2020. Eligible studies had to report original data, assess and quantify dietary intake and have been published in peer-reviewed academic journals. The reporting bias was calculated for each study where possible.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies used a single method to assess dietary intake and seven studies used a combination of methods. The most commonly used methods were the gold standard food intake/waste method, Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) or a food diary (FD). The only method to date that has been validated in military settings is weighed food records (WFR).

CONCLUSIONS

The food intake/waste method or WFR should be used where feasible. Where this is not practical the FFQ or FD should be considered with control measures applied. There is currently not sufficient evidence to state that using multiple methods together improves validity.