Towards best practice in physical and physiological employment standards.
While the scope of the term physical employment standards is wide, the principal focus of this paper is on standards related to physiological evaluation of readiness for work. Common applications of such employment standards for work are in public safety and emergency response occupations (e.g., police, firefighting, military), and there is an ever-present need to maximize the scientific quality of this research. Historically, most of these occupations are male-dominated, which leads to potential sex bias during physical demands analysis and determining performance thresholds. It is often assumed that older workers advance to positions with lower physical demand. However, this is not always true, which raises concerns about the long-term maintenance of physiological readiness. Traditionally, little attention has been paid to the inevitable margin of uncertainty that exists around cut-scores. Establishing confidence intervals around the cut-score can reduce for this uncertainty. It may also be necessary to consider the effects of practise and biological variability on test scores. Most tests of readiness for work are conducted under near perfect conditions, while many emergency responses take place under far more demanding and unpredictable conditions. The potential impact of protective clothing, respiratory protection, load carriage, environmental conditions, nutrition, fatigue, sensory deprivation, and stress should also be considered when evaluating readiness for work. In this paper, we seek to establish uniformity in terminology in this field, identify key areas of concern, provide recommendations to improve both scientific and professional practice, and identify priorities for future research.
a Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2H9, Canada.
Stewart R
SR
Petersen
b Justice Institute of British Columbia, New Westminster, BC V3L 5T4, Canada.
Gregory S
GS
Anderson
c Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, Hants, PO1 2ER, UK.
Michael J
MJ
Tipton
d School of Exercise Science, Physical & Health Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada.
David
D
Docherty
e Department of Human Health and Nutritional Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada.
Terry E
TE
Graham
f Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA.
Brian J
BJ
Sharkey
g Centre for Human and Applied Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.
Nigel A S
NA
Taylor
D004651:Employment / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D016272:Occupational Health / Q000592:standards*; D010809:Physical Fitness
cut-scores; droits de la personne; employment standards; fiabilité; human rights; installation de base; normes d’emploi; reliability; seuils de coupure; standard setting; validity; validité