Page 61 - Journal of Special Operations Medicine - Winter 2016

Table 3 Anthropomorphic and Performance Comparisons between Training Groups
KB (n = 7) KB + Run (n = 6) Traditional AF PT (n = 7)
Item Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
Weight, kg 81.4 (12.4) 79.7 (12.9) 79.5(15.0) 80.65 (15.3) 82.9 (15.1) 83.1(14.9)
Body fat, % 23.2 (8.3) 20.7 (8.6) a 26.0 (8.3) 26.7 (7.7) 24.5 (7.6) 23.7 (8.1)
Max push-ups b 40.6 (8.0) 46.7 (13.4) 24.0 (17.3) 31.7 (20.8) a 37.8 (11.3) c 47.2 (16.8) c
Max sit-ups b 47.1 (14.9) 50.3 (9.0) 43.8 (13.8) 44.0 (14.1) 44.7 (8.9) d 52.5 (4.7) d
1.5-mile run e 12:13 (1:23) 12:01 (1:14) 12:55 (1:53) 13:10 (2:05) 13:34 (1:39) d 14:27 (3:05) d
Max grip strength, kg 38.9 (11.7) 42.0 (11.2) 34.4 (13.5) 35.9 (15.1) 37.9 (13.5) 40.8 (11.5)
Pro agility, seconds 5.5 (0.4) 5.5 (0.4) 6.2 (0.9) 6.1 (1.0) 5.6 (0.4) f 5.7 (0.5) f
Vertical jump, cm 39.6 (9.4) 40.9 (10.7) 36.3 (14.7) 37.1 (14.5) 37.3 (8.1) 37.3 (9.9) f
40-yard dash, seconds 6.2 (1.0) 5.8 (0.9) a 7.0 (1.2) 6.5 (1.0) a 6.2 (0.6) f 6.0 (0.5) f
Data given as mean (standard deviation). AF, Air Force; max, maximum; KB, kettlebell; PT, physical training.
b
a Significantly different from pretest (p ≤ .05). Number per minute. n = 5. n = 4. minutes:seconds. n = 6.
c
f
e
d
Figure 2 Percent Improvements in 1.5-mile run, 40-yard Table 4 HR Response to Training
dash, and push-ups.
Group Mean HR Peak HR
KB 163.1 (4.2) a 182.3 (2.1) b
KB + Run 159.5 (4.3) 176.8 (2.1) b
Traditional USAF PT 159.7 (3.1) 171.0 (3.2)
Data given as mean (standard deviation). HR, heart rate; KB, kettle-
bell; PT, physical training; USAF, US Air Force.
a KB group mean HR was significantly higher than that of the tradi-
tional USAF PT group (p = .049).
b KB and KB + run groups’ HRs were significantly higher than that of
the traditional USAF PT group (p < .0001).

push-up improvement (p = .058) even though these
two groups did not perform push-ups. Interestingly,
the KB + run group did not perform any push-ups but
*Significantly different from baseline within group, p ≤ .05. had a higher percent improvement in maximal push-ups
(31.9%) than the traditional PT group (24.9%), who
in the KB group compared with the KB + run (p < .001) performed push-ups three times per week for 10 weeks.
and the PT groups (p < .001). The KB + run group peak
HR was also significantly higher than that of the PT The results of this pilot study show promise for airmen
group (p < .001). who are training to gain fitness and who seek alternative
forms of training to add variety to their existing routine
and improve operationally relevant aspects of fitness.
Discussion
However, these results should be interpreted with cau-
To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate tion because of the particularly small sample size, and
the effects of continuous KB swing training in USAF the uneven final distribution of men to women across
airmen on a combination of fitness parameters such as groups because of attrition.
military fitness assessment performance, strength, speed,
power, and agility. There were no statistically significant The KB swing regimen in both KB groups elicited a
changes in predictive maximal aerobic capacity from substantial aerobic and anaerobic stress that produced
the USAF 1.5-mile run in any group. Both KB groups higher peak HRs than moderate-intensity running. Simi-
performed minimal amounts of running (i.e., the KB + lar to this study, Thomas et al. reported that continu-
12
run group ran for 10 minutes three times per week and ous KB training can produce the same metabolic stress
the KB group did not run) yet still maintained 1.5 miles and greater aerobic fitness responses than brisk tread-
run times and achieved statistically significant improve- mill walking at 4% grade and 4 mph. Furthermore,
ments in sprinting speed. Furthermore, the KB + run these same investigators surmised that the metabolic
group significantly improved 1-minute maximal push- responses for KB training met the ACSM Aerobic Fit-
ups, and there was a trend in the KB group for maximal ness Standards to improve aerobic fitness. This finding

Physiological Effects of Kettlebell Swing Training 45