Military Versus Law Enforcement Body Armour

This project was commissioned by Australian Defence Apparel Pty Ltd and was conducted in collaboration with Optimal Performance Solutions. The aim of the project was to investigate the differences between military body armour (MBA: 6.4kg) and a specifically designed law enforcement body armour (LEBA: 2.1kg) on selected physical performance, task simulations, and subjective measures. Data were collected by the Tactical Research Unit at the Bond University Institute of Health and Sport over the period 2–3 October 2017. Ten volunteer police officers (six females, four males) completed the variety of assessments over a two-day period while randomly allocated to a counterbalanced, repeated measures, design to trial the two body armour variants.The selected outcome measures included measures to assess: a) physical performance (postural sway, a vertical jump, the Illinois Agility Test and Functional Movement Screen[FMS]), b) task simulations (vehicle exit and 5m sprint and 10 m sprint with 10 m victim recovery), and subjective measures (using a visual analogue scale and a mannequin sketch).Body armour type did not significantly affect any aspect of postural sway or yield any differences in force production during the vertical jump, vehicle exit and 5m sprint times, or 10m sprint with 10m victim recovery times. Wearing either type of body armour led to an increased velocity of sway and sway path length in the final five seconds of a balance task when compared with the first 5 seconds, indicating that sway control declined after 30 seconds of wearing either type of body armour. Wearing the MBA resulted in significantly slower times to complete the agility task, poorer FMS total scores, and poorer subjective ratings of performance and comfort across all tasks when compared to the LEBA.Trips and falls are a leading mechanism of injury in law enforcement populations, and although there were no significant differences between LEBA and MBA in postural measures, MBA did show a greater reduction in postural control when compared with LEBA. Likewise, FMS scores for the MBA were significantly lower than were those for the LEBA, with the total score (13.4 points) reduced to the point where it was below the score associated with an increased risk of injury (< 14 points). Performance over an agility course, measured in time to completion, was also found to be significantly lower in the MBA when compared with LEBA. Overall, the participating officers considered the LEBA to be more comfortable and were more positive in their subjective ratings of their own performance during the agility and task simulation performance when wearing the LEBA.