Measuring joint range of motion is an important skill for many allied health professionals. While the Universal Goniometer is the most commonly utilised clinical tool for measuring joint range of motion, the evolution of smartphone technology and applications (apps) provides the clinician with more measurement options. However, the reliability and validity of these smartphones and apps is still somewhat uncertain. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature regarding the intra- and inter-rater reliability and validity of smartphones and apps to measure joint range of motion. Eligible studies were published in English peer-reviewed journals with full text available, involving the assessment of reliability and/or validity of a non-videographic smartphone app to measure joint range of motion in participants >18 years old. An electronic search using PubMed, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTSDiscus was performed. The risk of bias was assessed using a standardised appraisal tool. Twenty-three of the eligible 25 studies exceeded the minimum 60% score to be classified as a low risk of bias, although 3 of the 13 criteria were not achieved in >50% of the studies. Most of the studies demonstrated adequate intra-rater or inter-rater reliability and/or validity for >50% of the range of motion tests across all joints assessed. However, this level of evidence appeared weaker for absolute (e.g. mean difference ± limit of agreement, minimal detectable change) than relative (e.g. intraclass correlation, correlation) measures; and for spinal rotation than spinal extension, flexion and lateral flexion. Our results provide clinicians with sufficient evidence to support the use of smartphones and apps in place of goniometers to measure joint motion. Future research should address some methodological limitations of the literature, especially including the inclusion of absolute and not just relative reliability and validity statistics.

Firefighters, along with other tactical personnel, are at a high risk of work-related physical injury above that of the private sector. The aim of this critical narrative review was to identify, critically appraise and synthesise key findings from recent literature investigating firefighting musculoskeletal injuries to inform injury reduction programs. The methodological approach (search terms, databases, etc.) was registered with PROSPERO and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist with scores graded according to the Kennelly grading system. Levels of evidence were ranked according to the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Of the 8231 studies identified, 17 met the criteria for inclusion. The methodological quality of the studies was ‘fair’ with a level of evidence of III-2. Reported injury rates ranged from 9% to 74% with the lower extremities and back the leading aggregated bodily sites of injury. Sprains and strains were the leading nature of musculoskeletal injury, often caused by slips, trips and falls, although muscle bending, lifting and squatting or muscle stressing were also prevalent. This review may inform injury reduction strategies and given that injuries reported in firefighters are similar to those of other tactical populations, safety processes to mitigate injuries may be of benefit across the tactical spectrum.

Purpose: Low injury rates have previously been correlated with sporting team success, highlighting the importance of injury prevention programs. Recent methods, such as acute:chronic workload ratios (ACWR) have been developed in an attempt to predict and manage injury risk; however, the relation between these methods and injury risk is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize the key findings of studies that have investigated the relationship between ACWR and injury risk. Methods: Included studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black checklist, and a level of evidence was determined. Relevant data were extracted, tabulated, and synthesized. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included for review and ranged in percentage quality scores from 48.2% to 64.3%. Almost perfect interrater agreement (κ = 0.885) existed between raters. This review found a high variability between studies with different variables studied (total distance versus high speed running), as well as differences between ratios analyzed (1.50– 1.80 versus ≥ 1.50), and reference groups (a reference group of 0.80– 1.20 versus ≤ 0.85). Conclusion: Considering the high variability, it appears that utilizing ACWR for external (eg, total distance) and internal (eg, heart rate) loads may be related to injury risk. Calculating ACWR using exponentially weighted moving averages may potentially result in a more sensitive measure. There also appears to be a trend towards the ratios of 0.80– 1.30 demonstrating the lowest risk of injury. However, there may be issues with the ACWR method that must be addressed before it is confidently used to mitigate injury risk. Utilizing standardized approaches will allow for more objective conclusions to be drawn across multiple populations.

Several occupations require workers to spend long periods of time driving road vehicles. This occupational task is associated with musculoskeletal disorders. The purpose of this review was to collate, synthesize, and analyze research reporting on musculoskeletal disorders associated with occupational driving, in order to develop a volume of evidence to inform occupational disorder mitigation strategies. A systematic search of academic databases (PubMed, EBSCO host, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) was performed using key search terms. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists. A Cohen’s kappa analysis was used to determine interrater agreement between appraisers. Of the 18,254 identified studies, 25 studies were selected and appraised. The mean critical appraisal score is 69% (range 38–100%), with a fair level of agreement (k = 0.332). The studies report that musculoskeletal disorders, most commonly lower back pain, is of concern in this population, particularly in truck, bus, and taxi drivers. Risk factors for these occupations include long hours in a sitting position, years in the profession, vehicle ergonomics, and vibration.

The current literature suggests that load carriage can impact on a tactical officer’s mobility, and that survival in the field may rely on the officer’s mobility. The ability for humans to generate power and agility is critical for performance of the high-intensity movements required in the field of duty. The aims of this review were to critically examine the literature investigating the impacts of load carriage on measures of power and agility and to synthesize the findings. The authors completed a search of the literature using key search terms in four databases. After relevant studies were located using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, the studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black Checklist and relevant data were extracted and tabled. Fourteen studies were deemed relevant for this review, ranging in percentage quality scores from 42.85% to 71.43%. Outcome measures used in these studies to indicate levels of power and agility included short-distance sprints, vertical jumps, and agility runs, among others. Performance of both power and agility was shown to decrease when tactical load was added to the participants. This suggests that the increase in weight carried by tactical officers may put this population at risk of injury or fatality in the line of duty.

Objectives: Heart Rate Variability has gained substantial interest in both clinical and athletic settings as a measurement tool for quantifying autonomic nervous system activity and psychophysiological stress. However, its uses in tactical work settings, such as military, police, and firefighting environments, remain controversial. Given the physical, mental, and emotional stress public safety personnel face both operationally and in training, heart rate variability measurement may be key in promoting their health, safety and operational effectiveness. Methods: This study identified, critically appraised, and summarized primary studies investigating relationships between heart rate variability and outcomes of interest to tactical personnel. Key literature databases were searched, and quality assessment checklists were applied to analyze retained literature. The results of the screening and assessment processes, along with key data extracted from each study were summarized and tabulated. Research gaps were also identified to facilitate improvements to how tactical personnel and health or performance providers may best utilize heart rate variability to monitor or promote personnel health and performance, and thereby facilitate public safety. Results: Twenty studies were included and were all of generally high quality. Cohort size, length of follow-up, measurement objectives, data acquisition, and data analysis all varied considerably across studies, precluding meta-analysis. However, study results correlating heart rate variability and relevant outcomes indicated that overall, heart rate variability is an effective indicator of key fitness and performance elements in the tactical work setting. Conclusions: Heart rate variability can be an effective health and performance tool in tactical work environments. However, measurement methods must be carefully selected and applied. Further research is required to understand causal relationships. Specifically, larger cohort inclusion and the isolation and study of specific variables unique to public safety work and training may improve the effectiveness of heart rate variability measurement to provide meaningful information to end users and providers.