IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i5p893-d144031.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Effects of Different Body Armor Systems on the Occupational Performance of Police Officers

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Schram

    (Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Robina, QLD 4226, Australia)

  • Robin Orr

    (Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Robina, QLD 4226, Australia)

  • Rodney Pope

    (Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, Robina, QLD 4226, Australia
    School of Community Health, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia)

  • Ben Hinton

    (New South Wales Police—Health and Fitness Unit, Sydney, NSW 2150, Australia)

  • Geoff Norris

    (New South Wales Police—Operational Safety and Skills Command, Sydney, NSW 2150, Australia)

Abstract

Policing duties may inherently be dangerous due to stab, blunt trauma and ballistic threats. The addition of individual light armor vests (ILAVs) has been suggested as a means to protect officers. However, the addition of the extra load of the ILAV may affect officer ability to conduct occupational tasks. The purpose of this study was to determine if wearing any of three different ILAVs made by different companies with their preferred materials and designs (ILAV A, 4.68 percent body weight, ILAV B, 4.05 percent body weight, & ILAV C, 3.71 percent body weight) affected occupational task performance when compared to that in normal station wear. A prospective, within-subjects repeated measures design was employed, using a counterbalanced randomization in which each ILAV was worn for an entire day while officers completed a variety of occupationally relevant tasks. These tasks included a victim drag, car exit and 5-meter sprint, step down and marksmanship task. To compare the effects of the ILAVs on these tasks, a multivariate repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted, with post hoc pairwise comparisons using a Bonferroni adjustment. Results showed that performance in each task did not vary between any of the ILAV or normal station wear conditions. There was less variability in the marksmanship task with ILAV B, however. The results suggest that none of the ILAVs used in this study were heavy enough to significantly affect task performance in the assessed tasks when compared to wearing normal station wear.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Schram & Robin Orr & Rodney Pope & Ben Hinton & Geoff Norris, 2018. "Comparing the Effects of Different Body Armor Systems on the Occupational Performance of Police Officers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-8, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:5:p:893-:d:144031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/5/893/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/5/893/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert G. Lockie & Robin M. Orr & Matthew R. Moreno & J. Jay Dawes & Joseph M. Dulla, 2019. "Time Spent Working in Custody Influences Work Sample Test Battery Performance of Deputy Sheriffs Compared to Recruits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Damir Sekulic & Nikola Foretic & Barbara Gilic & Michael R. Esco & Raouf Hammami & Ognjen Uljevic & Sime Versic & Miodrag Spasic, 2019. "Importance of Agility Performance in Professional Futsal Players; Reliability and Applicability of Newly Developed Testing Protocols," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Robert G. Lockie & J. Jay Dawes & Katherine Balfany & Ciara E. Gonzales & Maria M. Beitzel & Joseph M. Dulla & Robin M. Orr, 2018. "Physical Fitness Characteristics That Relate to Work Sample Test Battery Performance in Law Enforcement Recruits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-12, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:5:p:893-:d:144031. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.