A Comparison of two physical ability tests for firefighters

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<rdf:Description>
<dc:creator>Mamen, Asgeir</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2013-10-07</dc:date>
<dc:description xml:lang="es">Sumario: Smoke diving is physically demanding, and firefighters must therefore meet certain minimum physical requirements. The aim of this study was to compare the physiological demands of two fire fitness tests: a test of 8-min treadmill walking approved by the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority (NLIA) (a laboratory test) and a Canadian test consisting of 10 firefighting specific tasks carried out in sequence (an applied field test). If the Canadian field test is as physically demanding as the NLIA-approved laboratory test, it may be suitable for testing Norwegian firefighters. Twenty-two male professional firefighters were tested on separate days. In both tests, the subjects wore a complete firefighting outfit including a breathing apparatus. The test durations were 8 min (NLIA test) versus approximately 6 min (Canadian test). Neither the peak O2 uptake (VO2) of approximately 45 ml kg - 1 min - 1 nor the blood lactate concentration (BLC) at test termination (  9 mmol L - 1) differed between the two tests. Rating of perceived exertion (RPECR-10) was lower for the Canadian test than for the Norwegian test (5.2  ±  1.5 vs. 7.0  ±  2.0, respectively), and the exercise time at a high VO2 was also shorter. In conclusion, the Canadian test appeared to be almost as physically demanding as the NLIA-approved test, having equal peak VO2 and BLC, but shorter time at a high VO2 and shorter duration. It might thus be a suitable alternative to the NLIA test with some modifications. The advantage of the Canadian field test is the inclusion of specific firefighting-like tasks that are not part of the NLIA test.</dc:description>
<dc:identifier>https://documentacion.fundacionmapfre.org/documentacion/publico/es/bib/145256.do</dc:identifier>
<dc:language>spa</dc:language>
<dc:rights xml:lang="es">InC - http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</dc:rights>
<dc:type xml:lang="es">Artículos y capítulos</dc:type>
<dc:title xml:lang="es">A Comparison of two physical ability tests for firefighters</dc:title>
<dc:relation xml:lang="es">En: Ergonomics : the international journal of research and practice in human factors and ergonomics. - Oxon [United Kingdom] : Taylor & Francis, 2010- = ISSN 0014-0139. - 07/10/2013 Volumen 56 Número 10 - octubre 2013 </dc:relation>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>