Page 115 - JSOM Winter 2019

compared with the T-10, and the PAB that reduced ankle inju- 14. Knapik JJ, Graham B, Steelman R, et al. The Advance Tactical
ries by about half. It is likely that other innovations have con- Parachute System (T-11): Injuries during basic military parachute
tributed to the reduction in airborne-related injuries, but these training. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2011;82:935–940.
have not been documented in the literature. It is important to 15. Knapik JJ, Steelman R, Hoedebecke K, et al. Comparison of
document injury-reduction interventions so future paratroop- injury incidence between the T-11 Advance Tactical Parachute
System and the T-10D parachute, Fort Bragg, North Carolina,
ers and leaders can better understanding the rationale for use June 2010–November 2013. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: US
and their effectiveness. Army Institute of Public Health, Technical Report No. 12-HF-
27G0ED-14, 2014.
Disclaimer 16. Knapik JJ, Steelman R. Risk factors for injuries during military
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the au- static-line airborne operations: a systematic review and meta-
analysis. J Athl Training. 2016;51(11):962–980.
thors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the 17. Hadley AT, Hibst JD. Reduction of military high-altitude para-
Department of Defense, Department of the Army, US Army chute entanglements using the controlled alternating parachute
Medical Department, or the United States. The use of trade- exit system. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1984;55:65–68.
mark names does not imply endorsement by the US Army 18. Heckman JD, Levine MI. Traumatic closed transection of the bi-
but is intended only to assist in the identification of a specific ceps brachii in the military parachutist. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
product. 1978;60:369–372.
19. Kragh JF, Basamania CJ. Surgical repair of acute traumatic
closed transection of the biceps brachii. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
Disclosure 2002;84(6):992–998.
The author has nothing to disclose. 20. Rovere GD, Clarke TJ, Yates CS, et al. Retrospective comparison
of taping and ankle stabilizers in preventing ankle injuries. Am J
References Sports Med. 1988;16:228–233.
1. Knapik JJ. United States military parachute injuries. Part 1: Early 21. Sitler M, Ryan J, Wheeler B, et al. The efficacy of a semirigid
airborne history and secular trends in injury incidence. J Spec ankle stabilizer to reduce acute ankle injury in basketball. Am J
Oper Med. 2019;19(3):46–51. Sports Med. 1994;22:454–461.
2. Tobin WJ, Cohen LJ, Vandover JT. Parachute Injuries. JAMA. 22. Sharpe S, Knapik J, Jones B. Ankle braces effectively reduce re-
1941;117(16):1318–1321. currence of ankle sprains in female soccer players. J Athl Train-
3. Bricknell MCM, Craig SC. Military parachute injuries: a litera- ing. 1997;32:21–24.
ture review. Occup Med. 1999;49:17–26. 23. Amoroso PJ, Ryan JB, Bickley B, et al. Braced for impact: re-
4. Lord CD, Coots JW. Typical parachute injuries. A study of those ducing paratrooper’s ankle sprains using outside-the-boot braces.
occurring in 250,000 jumps at the parachute school. JAMA. J Trauma. 1998;45:575–580.
1944;125:1182–1187. 24. Static line parachuting techniques and training. Available at [http://
5. Lord CD, Coutts JW. A study of typical parachute injuries occur- www.combatreform.org/fm3_21x220.pdf]. Accessed: 8 May, 2019
ring in two hundred and fifty thousand jumps at the parachute 25. Schumacher JT, Creedon JF, Pope RW. The effectiveness of the
school. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1944;26:547–557. parachute ankle brace in reducing ankle injuries in an airborne
6. Richards G: World War II Troop Type Parachutes Allies: U.S., ranger battalion. Milit Med. 2000;165:944–948.
Britain, Russia. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Limited; 2003. 26. Schmidt MD, Sulsky SI, Amoroso PJ. Effectiveness of an external
7. Weeks J: Airborne Equipment. A History of Its Development. ankle brace in reducing parachute-related ankle injuries. Inj Prev.
New York, NY: Hippocrene Books, Inc; 1976. 2005;11:163–168.
8. Miser WF, Lillegard WA, Doukas WC. Injuries and illness in- 27. Knapik JJ, Darakjy S, Swedler D, et al. Parachute ankle brace
curred by an Army Ranger unit during Operation Just Cause. Mil and extrinsic injury risk factors during parachuting. Aviat Space
Med. 1995;160:373–380. Environ Med. 2008;79:408–415.
9. Army Test and Evaluation Command. Operational Test Agency 28. Knapik JJ, Spiess A, Swedler D, et al. Injury risk factors in para-
Evaluation Report (OER) for the Advanced Tactical Parachute chuting and acceptability of the parachute ankle brace. Aviat
System (ATPS) Milestone C-Type Classification. Alexandria, VA: Space Environ Med. 2008;79:689–694
US Army Test and Evaluation Command, 2009. 29. Luippold RS, Sulsky SI, Amoroso PJ. Effectiveness of an external
10. Knapik JJ, Reynolds K. Loads Carried in Military Operations: A ankle brace in reducing parachute-related ankle injuries. Inj Prev.
Review of Historical, Biomechanical and Medical Aspects. Wash- 2011;17(1):58–61.
ington, DC, Borden Institute, No. 2010. 30. Knapik JJ, Spiess A, Swedler DI, et al. Systematic review of the
11. Dubik JM, Fullerton TD. Soldier overloading in Grenada. Mil parachute ankle brace for injury risk reduction and cost benefit.
Rev. 1987;67:38–47. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38:S182–S188.
12. Kotwal RS, Meyer DE, O’Connor KC, et al. Army Ranger ca- 31. Fogle JD, Jannings AC, Gross MT, et al. Concerns about ankle in-
sualty, attrition and surgery rates for airborne operations in Af- jury prophylaxis and acceptabtance of the parachute ankle brace
ghanistan and Iraq. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2004;75:833–840. among jumpmaster students Milit Med. 2018;183:e135–e139.
13. Allen K. Final Test Report for the Developmental Test of the Ad- 32. Static line parachuting techniques and training Available at
vanced Tactical Parachute System. Yuma Proving Ground, AZ: [https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf
Yuma Test Center, Technical Report No. YPG 06–136, 2006. /web/ARN13056_TC%203-21x220%20FINAL%20WEB.pdf].
Accessed: 8 May, 2019

Military Parachute History and Injuries | 113