The Effects of Body Armor on Lower Back and Knee Biomechanics During Basic and Military Inspired Tasks

Links

URL: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cbme_etds/24

Abstract and keywords

With increased military personal protection equipment, body armor, comes the addition of carried load. Such person protection in recent history has been instrumental in combating the imminent threats (e.g., improvised explosive devices) of hostile environments, preventing otherwise lethal injuries. However, body armor has been suggested to degrade warfighters’ performance and compound the risk of musculoskeletal injuries. Both performance and risk of injury are intensely related to joint biomechanics. Therefore the objective of this project was set to determine the immediate and prolonged effects of wearing body armor on biomechanics of the lower back and knee. A randomized cross-over study design, wherein 12 sex-balanced, physically fit, young participants completed a series of tests before and after 45 min of treadmill walking with and without body armor. Tests included two simple tests (i.e., toe-touch and two-legged squat), two military inspired tests (i.e., box drop and prone to standing) and four knee torque tests (i.e., maximum isometric contraction of knee flexors and extensors, and concentric and eccentric isokinetic contraction of knee flexors and extensors. During these tests, kinematic, kinetic and torque measurements were used to investigate the immediate and prolonged effects of exposure to body armor on several measures of knee and lower back mechanics related to performance and risk of injuries.

For the simple tests, the immediate effects of body armor were an increase of > 40 ms (p ≤ 0.02) in flexion duration of the dominant joint and an ~1 s (p ≤ 0.02) increase in overall test duration as well as an ~18% (p = 0.03) increase in the lumbopelvic rhythm ratio near mid-range trunk flexion. For the military inspired tests, the immediate effects of body armor were an increase of ≥ 0.02 s (p ≤ 0.001) in temporal test durations and an increase of ~158 N (p = 0.01) box drop peak ground reaction force. Finally during the dynamometer testing, the BA condition was found to cause a greater reduction, ~10 N·m, in the maximum isometric strength of knee flexors (p = 0.04) and an increase (p ≤ 0.03) of strength ratios compared to the no armor condition.

Keywords: Military Body Armor; Prolonged Walking; Performance; Risk of Injury; Military Ergonomics

Cited Works (7)

Year	Entry
2006	Li L. The Effect of Whole Body Vibration on Position Sense and Dynamic Low Back Stability [Master's thesis]. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas; 2006.
2008	Owens BD, Kragh JF Jr, Wenke JC, Macaitis J, Wade CE, Holcomb JB. Combat wounds in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. J Trauma. February 2008;64(2):295-299.
2009	Winter DA. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Inc, John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
2005	Bahr R, Krosshaug T. Understanding injury mechanisms: a key component of preventing injuries in sport. Br J Sports Med. June 2005;39(6):324-329.
2006	Hewett TE, Myer GD, Ford KR. Anterior cruciate ligament injuries in female athletes, I: mechanisms and risk factors. Am J Sports Med. February 2006;34(2):299-311.
2000	Griffin LY, Agel J, Albohm MJ, Arendt EA, Dick R, Garrett WE, Garrick JG, Hewett TE, Huston L, Ireland ML, Johnson RJ, Kibler WB, Lephart S, Lewis JL, Lindenfeld TN, Mandelbaum BR, Marchak P, Teitz CC, Wojtys EM. Noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: risk factors and prevention strategies. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. ;8(3):141-150.
1989	Brinckmann P, Biggemann M, Hilweg D. Prediction of the compressive strength of human lumbar vertebrae. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1989;4(suppl 2):S1-S27.