Search

Introduction In military service, marching is an important, common, and physically demanding task. Minimizing dropouts, maintaining operational readiness during the march, and achieving a fast recovery are desirable because the soldiers have to be ready for duty, sometimes shortly after an exhausting task. The present field study investigated the influence of the soldiers’ cardiorespiratory fitness on physiological responses during a long-lasting and challenging 34 km march. Materials and Methods Heart rate (HR), body core temperature (BCT), total energy expenditure (TEE), energy intake, motivation, and pain sensation were investigated in 44 soldiers (20.3 ± 1.3 years, 178.5 ± 7.0 cm, 74.8 ± 9.8 kg, body mass index: 23.4 ± 2.7 kg × m−2, peak oxygen uptake ($\dot{\rm{V}}$O2peak): 54.2 ± 7.9 mL × kg−1 × min−1) during almost 8 hours of marching. All soldiers were equipped with a portable electrocardiogram to record HR and an accelerometer on the hip, all swallowed a telemetry pill to record BCT, and all filled out a pre- and post-march questionnaire. The influence of aerobic capacity on the physiological responses during the march was examined by dividing the soldiers into three fitness groups according to their $\dot{\rm{V}}$O2peak. Results The group with the lowest aerobic capacity ($\dot{\rm{V}}$O2peak: 44.9 ± 4.8 mL × kg−1 × min−1) compared to the group with the highest aerobic capacity ($\dot{\rm{V}}$O2peak: 61.7 ± 2.2 mL × kg−1 × min−1) showed a significantly higher (P Conclusion Soldiers with a high $\dot{\rm{V}}$O2peak showed a lower mean HR and peak BCT throughout the long-distance march, as well as higher performance motivation, no dropouts, and lower energy deficit. All soldiers showed an enormous energy deficit; therefore, corresponding nutritional strategies are recommended.

Introduction Objectively determining soldiers’ fatigue levels could help prevent injuries or accidents resulting from inattention or decreased alertness. Eye-tracking technologies, such as optical eye tracking (OET) and electrooculography (EOG), are often used to monitor fatigue. Eyeblinks—especially blink frequency and blink duration—are known as easily observable and valid biomarkers of fatigue. Currently, various eye trackers (i.e., eye-tracking glasses) are available on the market using either OET or EOG technologies. These wearable eye trackers offer several advantages, including unobtrusive functionality, practicality, and low costs. However, several challenges and limitations must be considered when implementing these technologies in the field to monitor fatigue levels. This review investigates the feasibility of eye tracking in the field focusing on the practical applications in military operational environments. Materials and Method This paper summarizes the existing literature about eyeblink dynamics and available wearable eye-tracking technologies, exposing challenges and limitations, as well as discussing practical recommendations on how to improve the feasibility of eye tracking in the field. Results So far, no eye-tracking glasses can be recommended for use in a demanding work environment. First, eyeblink dynamics are influenced by multiple factors; therefore, environments, situations, and individual behavior must be taken into account. Second, the glasses’ placement, sunlight, facial or body movements, vibrations, and sweat can drastically decrease measurement accuracy. The placement of the eye cameras for the OET and the placement of the electrodes for the EOG must be chosen consciously, the sampling rate must be minimal 200 Hz, and software and hardware must be robust to resist any factors influencing eye tracking. Conclusion Monitoring physiological and psychological readiness of soldiers, as well as other civil professionals that face higher risks when their attention is impaired or reduced, is necessary. However, improvements to eye-tracking devices’ hardware, calibration method, sampling rate, and algorithm are needed in order to accurately monitor fatigue levels in the field.

Introduction High physical and cognitive strain, high pressure, and sleep deficit are part of daily life for military professionals and civilians working in physiologically demanding environments. As a result, cognitive and physical capacities decline and the risk of illness, injury, or accidents increases. Such unfortunate outcomes could be prevented by tracking real-time physiological information, revealing individuals’ objective fatigue levels. Oculometrics, and especially eyeblinks, have been shown to be promising biomarkers that reflect fatigue development. Head-mounted optical eye-trackers are a common method to monitor these oculometrics. However, studies measuring eyeblink detection in real-life settings have been lacking in the literature. Therefore, this study aims to validate two current mobile optical eye-trackers in an unrestrained military training environment. Materials and Method Three male participants (age 20.0 ± 1.0) of the Swiss Armed Forces participated in this study by wearing three optical eye-trackers, two VPS16s (Viewpointsystem GmbH, Vienna, Austria) and one Pupil Core (Pupil Labs GmbH, Berlin, Germany), during four military training events: Healthcare education, orienteering, shooting, and military marching. Software outputs were analyzed against a visual inspection (VI) of the video recordings of participants’ eyes via the respective software. Absolute and relative blink numbers were provided. Each blink detected by the software was classified as a “true blink” (TB) when it occurred in the software output and the VI at the same time, as a “false blink” (FB) when it occurred in the software but not in the VI, and as a “missed blink” (MB) when the software failed to detect a blink that occurred in the VI. The FBs were further examined for causes of the incorrect recordings, and they were divided into four categories: “sunlight,” “movements,” “lost pupil,” and “double-counted”. Blink frequency (i.e., blinks per minute) was also analyzed. Results Overall, 49.3% and 72.5% of registered eyeblinks were classified as TBs for the VPS16 and Pupil Core, respectively. The VPS16 recorded 50.7% of FBs and accounted for 8.5% of MBs, while the Pupil Core recorded 27.5% of FBs and accounted for 55.5% of MBs. The majority of FBs—45.5% and 73.9% for the VPS16 and Pupil Core, respectively—were erroneously recorded due to participants’ eye movements while looking up, down, or to one side. For blink frequency analysis, systematic biases (±limits of agreement) stood at 23.3 (±43.5) and −4.87 (±14.1) blinks per minute for the VPS16 and Pupil Core, respectively. Significant differences in systematic bias between devices and the respective VIs were found for nearly all activities (P Conclusion An objective physiological monitoring of fatigue is necessary for soldiers as well as civil professionals who are exposed to higher risks when their cognitive or physical capacities weaken. However, optical eye-trackers’ accuracy has not been specified under field conditions—especially not in monitoring fatigue. The significant overestimation and underestimation of the VPS16 and Pupil Core, respectively, demonstrate the general difficulty of blink detection in the field.

Objectives.To investigate the validity of different devices and algorithms used in military organizations worldwide to assess physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) and heart rate (HR) among soldiers. Design. Device validation study. Methods. Twenty-three male participants serving their mandatory military service accomplished, firstly, nine different military specific activities indoors, and secondly, a normal military routine outdoors. Participants wore simultaneously an ActiHeart, Everion, MetaMax 3B, Garmin Fenix 3, Hidalgo EQ02, and PADIS 2.0 system. The PAEE and HR data of each system were compared to the criterion measures MetaMax 3B and Hidalgo EQ02, respectively. Results. Overall, the recorded systematic errors in PAEE estimation ranged from 0.1 (±1.8) kcal.min−1 to −1.7 (±1.8) kcal.min−1 for the systems PADIS 2.0 and Hidalgo EQ02 running the Royal Dutch Army algorithm, respectively, and in the HR assessment ranged from −0.1 (±2.1) b.min−1 to 0.8 (±3.0) b.min−1 for the PADIS 2.0 and ActiHeart systems, respectively. The mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) in PAEE estimation ranged from 29.9% to 75.1%, with only the Everion system showing an overall MAPE, Physiological Measurement, 42 (8), ISSN:0967-3334, ISSN:1361-6579

Background Elite athletes and recreational runners rely on the accuracy of global navigation satellite system (GNSS)–enabled sport watches to monitor and regulate training activities. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence regarding the accuracy of such sport watches. Objective The aim was to investigate the accuracy of the recorded distances obtained by eight commercially available sport watches by Apple, Coros, Garmin, Polar, and Suunto when assessed in different areas and at different speeds. Furthermore, potential parameters that affect the measurement quality were evaluated. Methods Altogether, 3 × 12 measurements in urban, forest, and track and field areas were obtained while walking, running, and cycling under various outdoor conditions. Results The selected reference distances ranged from 404.0 m to 4296.9 m. For all the measurement areas combined, the recorded systematic errors (±limits of agreements) ranged between 3.7 (±195.6) m and –101.0 (±231.3) m, and the mean absolute percentage errors ranged from 3.2% to 6.1%. Only the GNSS receivers from Polar showed overall errors Conclusions The recorded distances might be underestimated by up to 9%. However, the use of all investigated sport watches can be recommended, especially for distance recordings in open areas.

BACKGROUND Elite athletes and recreational runners rely on the accuracy of global navigation satellite system (GNSS)–enabled sport watches to monitor and regulate training activities. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence regarding the accuracy of such sport watches. OBJECTIVE The aim was to investigate the accuracy of the recorded distances obtained by eight commercially available sport watches by Apple, Coros, Garmin, Polar, and Suunto when assessed in different areas and at different speeds. Furthermore, potential parameters that affect the measurement quality were evaluated. METHODS Altogether, 3 × 12 measurements in urban, forest, and track and field areas were obtained while walking, running, and cycling under various outdoor conditions. RESULTS The selected reference distances ranged from 404.0 m to 4296.9 m. For all the measurement areas combined, the recorded systematic errors (±limits of agreements) ranged between 3.7 (±195.6) m and –101.0 (±231.3) m, and the mean absolute percentage errors ranged from 3.2% to 6.1%. Only the GNSS receivers from Polar showed overall errors P values CONCLUSIONS The recorded distances might be underestimated by up to 9%. However, the use of all investigated sport watches can be recommended, especially for distance recordings in open areas.

Background Sport watches and fitness trackers provide a feasible way of obtaining energy expenditure (EE) estimations in daily life as well as during exercise. However, today’s popular wrist-worn technologies show only poor-to-moderate EE accuracy. Recently, the invention of optical heart rate measurement and the further development of accelerometers in wrist units have opened up the possibility of measuring EE. Objective This study aimed to validate the new multisensory wristwatch Polar Vantage and its EE estimation in healthy individuals during low-to-high-intensity activities against indirect calorimetry. Methods Overall, 30 volunteers (15 females; mean age 29.5 [SD 5.1] years; mean height 1.7 [SD 0.8] m; mean weight 67.5 [SD 8.7] kg; mean maximal oxygen uptake 53.4 [SD 6.8] mL/min·kg) performed 7 activities—ranging in intensity from sitting to playing floorball—in a semistructured indoor environment for 10 min each, with 2-min breaks in between. These activities were performed while wearing the Polar Vantage M wristwatch and the MetaMax 3B spirometer. Results After EE estimation, a mean (SD) of 69.1 (42.7) kcal and 71.4 (37.8) kcal per 10-min activity were reported for the MetaMax 3B and the Polar Vantage, respectively, with a strong correlation of r=0.892 (P Conclusions The Polar Vantage has a statistically moderate-to-good accuracy in EE estimation that is activity dependent. During sitting and reading activities, the EE estimation is very good, whereas during nonsteady activities that require wrist and arm movement, the EE accuracy is only moderate. However, compared with other available wrist-worn EE monitors, the Polar Vantage can be recommended, as it performs among the best.

BACKGROUND Sport watches and fitness trackers provide a feasible way of obtaining energy expenditure (EE) estimations in daily life as well as during exercise. However, today’s popular wrist-worn technologies show only poor-to-moderate EE accuracy. Recently, the invention of optical heart rate measurement and the further development of accelerometers in wrist units have opened up the possibility of measuring EE. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to validate the new multisensory wristwatch Polar Vantage and its EE estimation in healthy individuals during low-to-high-intensity activities against indirect calorimetry. METHODS Overall, 30 volunteers (15 females; mean age 29.5 [SD 5.1] years; mean height 1.7 [SD 0.8] m; mean weight 67.5 [SD 8.7] kg; mean maximal oxygen uptake 53.4 [SD 6.8] mL/min·kg) performed 7 activities—ranging in intensity from sitting to playing floorball—in a semistructured indoor environment for 10 min each, with 2-min breaks in between. These activities were performed while wearing the Polar Vantage M wristwatch and the MetaMax 3B spirometer. RESULTS After EE estimation, a mean (SD) of 69.1 (42.7) kcal and 71.4 (37.8) kcal per 10-min activity were reported for the MetaMax 3B and the Polar Vantage, respectively, with a strong correlation of r=0.892 (PPP=.03) predicted 29% of the error rates within the Polar Vantage. CONCLUSIONS The Polar Vantage has a statistically moderate-to-good accuracy in EE estimation that is activity dependent. During sitting and reading activities, the EE estimation is very good, whereas during nonsteady activities that require wrist and arm movement, the EE accuracy is only moderate. However, compared with other available wrist-worn EE monitors, the Polar Vantage can be recommended, as it performs among the best.

The aim of this study was to develop and cross-validate two models to estimate total energy expenditure (TEE) based on respiration variables in healthy subjects during daily physical activities. Ninety-nine male and female subjects systematically varying in age (18–60 years) and body mass index (BMI; 17–36 kg*m−2) completed eleven aerobic activities with a portable spirometer as the criterion measure. Two models were developed using linear regression analyses with the data from 67 randomly selected subjects (50.0% female, 39.9 ± 11.8 years, 25.1 ± 5.2 kg*m−2). The models were cross-validated with the other 32 subjects (49% female, 40.4 ± 10.7 years, 24.7 ± 4.6 kg*m−2) by applying equivalence testing and Bland-and-Altman analyses. Model 1, estimating TEE based solely on respiratory volume, respiratory rate, and age, was significantly equivalent to the measured TEE with a systematic bias of 0.06 kJ*min−1 (0.22%) and limits of agreement of ±6.83 kJ*min−1. Model 1 was as accurate in estimating TEE as Model 2, which incorporated further information on activity categories, heart rate, sex, and BMI. The results demonstrated that respiration variables and age can be used to accurately determine daily TEE for different types of aerobic activities in healthy adults across a broad range of ages and body sizes.

Purpose:To quantify gait asymmetry in well-trained runners with and without previous injuries during interval training sessions incorporating different distances.Methods:Twelve well-trained runners participated in 8 high-intensity interval-training sessions on a synthetic track over a 4-wk period. The training consisted of 10 × 400, 8 × 600, 7 × 800, and 6 × 1000-m running. Using an inertial measurement unit, the ground-contact time (GCT) of every step was recorded. To determine gait asymmetry, the GCTs between the left and right foot were compared.Results:Overall, gait asymmetry was 3.3% ± 1.4%, and over the course of a training session, the gait asymmetry did not change (F1,33 = 1.673, P = .205). The gait asymmetry of the athletes with a previous history of injury was significantly greater than that of the athletes without a previous injury. However, this injury-related enlarged asymmetry was detectable only at short (400 m), but not at longer, distances (600–1000 m).Conclusion:The gait asymmetry of well-trained athletes differed, depending on their history of injury and the running distance. To detect gait asymmetries, high-intensity runs over relatively short distances are recommended.