Search

OBJECTIVES:To examine the effects of sleep restriction on firefighters' physical task performance during simulated wildfire suppression. METHODS:Thirty-five firefighters were matched and randomly allocated to either a control condition (8-hour sleep opportunity, n = 18) or a sleep restricted condition (4-hour sleep opportunity, n = 17). Performance on physical work tasks was evaluated across three days. In addition, heart rate, core temperature, and worker activity were measured continuously. Rate of perceived and exertion and effort sensation were evaluated during the physical work periods. RESULTS:There were no differences between the sleep-restricted and control groups in firefighters' task performance, heart rate, core temperature, or perceptual responses during self-paced simulated firefighting work tasks. However, the sleep-restricted group were less active during periods of non-physical work compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS:Under self-paced work conditions, 4 h of sleep restriction did not adversely affect firefighters' performance on physical work tasks. However, the sleep-restricted group were less physically active throughout the simulation. This may indicate that sleep-restricted participants adapted their behaviour to conserve effort during rest periods, to subsequently ensure they were able to maintain performance during the firefighter work tasks. This work contributes new knowledge to inform fire agencies of firefighters' operational capabilities when their sleep is restricted during multi-day wildfire events. The work also highlights the need for further research to explore how sleep restriction affects physical performance during tasks of varying duration, intensity, and complexity.

This study assessed the accumulated effect of ambient heat on the performance of, and physiological and perceptual responses to, intermittent, simulated wildfire fighting tasks over three consecutive days. Firefighters (n = 36) were matched and allocated to either the CON (19°C) or HOT (33°C) condition. They performed three days of intermittent, self-paced simulated firefighting work, interspersed with physiological testing. Task repetitions were counted (and converted to distance or area) to determine work performance. Participants were asked to rate their perceived exertion and thermal sensation after each task. Heart rate, core temperature (Tc), and skin temperature (Tsk) were recorded continuously throughout the simulation. Fluids were consumed ad libitum. Urine volume was measured throughout, and urine specific gravity (USG) analysed, to estimate hydration. All food and fluid consumption was recorded. There was no difference in work output between experimental conditions. However, significant variation in performance responses between individuals was observed. All measures of thermal stress were elevated in the HOT, with core and skin temperature reaching, on average, 0.24 ± 0.08°C and 2.81 ± 0.20°C higher than the CON group. Participants' doubled their fluid intake in the HOT condition, and this was reflected in the USG scores, where the HOT participants reported significantly lower values. Heart rate was comparable between conditions at nearly all time points, however the peak heart rate reached each circuit was 7 ± 3% higher in the CON trial. Likewise, RPE was slightly elevated in the CON trial for the majority of tasks. Participants' work output was comparable between the CON and HOT conditions, however the performance change over time varied significantly between individuals. It is likely that the increased fluid replacement in the heat, in concert with frequent rest breaks and task rotation, assisted with the regulation of physiological responses (e.g., heart rate, core temperature).