Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsams

Review

Optimising training adaptations and performance in military

environment
Heikki Kyröläinen a,b,∗ , Kai Pihlainen c , Jani P. Vaara b , Tommi Ojanen d , Matti Santtila b
a
Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyväskylä, Finland
b
Department of Leadership and Military Pedagogy, National Defence University, Finland
c
Training Division, Defence Command, Finland
d
Human Performance Division, Finnish Defence Research Agency, Finland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Objectives: Worldwide decreases in physical fitness and increases in body fat among youth have set chal-
Received 29 August 2017 lenges for armed forces to recruit physically capable soldiers. Therefore, knowledge of optimizing physical
Received in revised form adaptation and performance through physical training is vital. In addition, maintaining or improving
15 November 2017
physical performance among professional soldiers in various military environments is crucial for overall
Accepted 28 November 2017
military readiness. The present review focuses on the effects of military training on physical performance
Available online 20 December 2017
by searching for optimal methods to do it.
Design and methods: Review article based on selected literature searches using the main keywords
Keywords: ®
Soldier ‘physical performance’ and ‘training’ and ‘military’ from MEDLINE and SportDiscus engines. Additional
Strength selected references were included that encompassed the same words but were not found in the present
Endurance search.
Body composition Results: Military training mainly consists of prolonged physical activities and training performed at low-
intensities, which may interfere with optimal muscle strength and considering development of maximal
strength, power, and aerobic capacity. Combined endurance and strength training seems to be a superior
training method to improve overall physical performance of soldiers.
Conclusions: The present study demonstrated that military training needs a greater variation in training
stimulus to induce more effective training adaptations, especially, when considering the development
of maximal or explosive strength and maximal aerobic capacity. Training programs should be well peri-
odised so that total training load increases progressively but also includes sufficient recovery periods. In
addition, some individualized programming is required to avoid unnecessary injuries and overloading
because the differences in initial physical fitness of soldiers can be very high.
© 2017 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the
CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction physical performance needed during the following training phases.

For professional soldiers, the focus is to reach or maintain the physi-
The average aerobic fitness of young men entering military cal performance level required for deployment and occupation. The
service has declined and has been accompanied by a simultane- outcome of physical training programs depends on training vol-
ous increases in body mass, especially in western countries.1,2 ume (duration, distance or repetitions), intensity (load, velocity or
At the same time, however, it is well recognised that successful power) and frequency, which are key factors of training. In sports
performance of military duties requires a high level of physical fit- training, total training load, nutrition and recovery are typically
ness, especially, aerobic fitness and muscular strength.3,4 Physical planned in an individual way in order to optimise training adap-
training, of which specific aims vary in relation to the phase of a tations and minimise training-related injuries and overtraining.
soldier’s career, is the most effective method to improve or main- Similarly, when designing a training plan in a military environ-
tain physical performance. The goal of military basic training (BT), ment, the coach, tactical strength and conditioning facilitator, or
for example, is to reach an employment standard level or a level of military instructor must first decide which factors to emphasise in
order to meet the performance goals or task requirements. At the
same time, it is important that these emphasised training factors
∗ Corresponding author. are also well in proportion with the trainee’s individual needs and
E-mail address: heikki.kyrolainen@jyu.fi (H. Kyröläinen). initial fitness level, and that the training plan is well periodised.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2017.11.019
1440-2440/© 2017 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1132 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138

Fig. 1. Several factors affect total training load, training adaptation and performance of an individual soldier in military environments.

In general, several factors such as age, sex, training history, together, we found almost 200 published articles, of which 60 were
recovery, sleep and nutrition, as well as environmental, psycholog- selected for this review according to inclusive criteria of the main
ical, and social factors can significantly affect training adaptations. keywords. The published articles mainly focused on male army sol-
In addition, optimising performance in military environments is diers who can be further divided into two main categories; recruits
often challenged by external stress factors such as prolonged phys- or conscripts with no prior experience performing military duties;
ical activity while carrying loads, negative energy and fluid balance, and professional soldiers.
sustained readiness, and sleep deprivation.5–7 Therefore, train-
ing load combined with these external stress factors can lead to
compromised training adaptations and/or overreaching and over- 3. Endurance training
training in addition to increased musculoskeletal injury rates.8–10
These factors should be taken into account when planning and Traditionally, endurance training in the military has consisted
implementing optimal training programs for soldiers. Fig. 1 sum- of moderate-intensity running, walking or marches with or with-
marizes factors affecting optimal development of soldiers’ physical out load carriage at a constant speed.11 Santtila et al.11 found that
performance and, therefore, operational readiness. additional endurance training during military BT did not produce
As mentioned earlier, a variety of factors, which differ indi- additional gains in aerobic fitness. Despite this finding, moderate
vidually, have influences on optimised training adaptations in intensity aerobic training, such as marching with extra loads, is still
military environments. In recruits, military training consists of a a widely used training method in the military. Recent studies have
high amount of low-intensity physical activity, which can be a chal- suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) will induce
lenge for optimising improvements in strength performance.11 For similar or superior training responses compared to moderate-
professional soldiers, on the other hand, the challenges arise more intensity endurance training with less time commitment.15 HIIT
from reaching and maintaining the performance level set for more refers to a training mode that involves repeated, relatively brief
demanding occupational requirements or deployment standards. bouts at high intensity interspersed with lower intensity periods
Furthermore, due to physiological sex differences, female soldiers of recovery.15,16 HIIT has been shown to induce greater neuro-
are often required to increase their physical fitness to a greater muscular adaptations than traditional endurance training.17 Thus,
extent compared to male soldiers.12,13 In particular, tasks involv- a low volume of HIIT may elicit a higher neuromuscular training
ing extra loads or carry and lifting heavy materials seem to be more effect and thereby may better induce developments in strength
challenging for female soldiers due to their smaller body size and performance as a part of combined training. Nevertheless, to date
lower muscular fitness levels. Therefore, physical fitness demands there are only a very few HIIT studies implemented in military
are relatively higher for female soldiers compared to those of male environments.15
soldiers.14 Training principles and periodisation in endurance and Knuttgen et al.18 compared adaptations to HIIT in three training
strength training are essentially the same for both sexes.13 groups of conscripts. Each group performed HIIT by running 15 min
The present review aimed to explore studies that have per session, with one group performing 5 training sessions per week
attempted to improve physical performance by optimising phys- for one month, and the other two groups 3 sessions per week for
ical training adaptations in military environments in both recruits two months. In total, all groups had 19 training sessions during the
and professional soldiers. In addition, possible mechanisms for sub- study period. The improvement in maximal aerobic capacity was
optimal adaptations and optimisation of training strategies are around 20% in all groups. Kilen et al.19 studied training adaptations
discussed. of professional soldiers in two training groups: one performing nine
15-min training sessions per week (“microtraining”) and the other
2. Design and methods performing three 45-min sessions (“traditional training”) during 8
weeks with sessions of strength, high-intensity endurance training
The present review focuses on the military training effects on and muscle endurance. Both groups improved shuttle run perfor-
physical performance. The articles have been selected from lit- mance but only the “microtraining” group improved peak oxygen
erature searches using the keywords ‘physical performance’ and uptake, grip strength, and loaded lunge performance. Finally, the
®
‘training’ and ‘military’ from MEDLINE and SportDiscus search authors concluded that short and more frequent training sessions
engines. Additional selected references were included that encom- can induce at least similar training adaptations compared to longer
passed the same words but were not found in the present search. All and less frequent sessions.
 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138 1133

Gist et al.20 studied the effects of HIIT training performed as due to the aerobic nature of military training itself, especially, dur-
calisthenics, otherwise known as high-intensity functional training ing military BT in recruits or conscripts. Moreover, for professional
(HIFT) in twenty cadets. The participants performed a 4-week train- soldiers, endurance training is always integrated into their total
ing period with 3 exercises per week either in a group with typical training program; thus, limited research is available investigating
physical training (combined endurance and muscular endurance strength training adaptations alone.
exercises) or HIFT. The typical training group performed 60-min In conclusion, non-optimal adaptation to added strength train-
workouts consisting of one running exercise with moderate inten- ing during initial military training may be a result of interference
sity, one exercise of self-paced load carriage, and one exercise effect. Thus, periodisation of strength and endurance training may
of moderate intensity running followed by calisthenics. The HIFT improve adaptations to strength training. The programming of
group performed 4–7 sets of 30 s “all-out” burpees with 4 min of strength training should be planned carefully, taking into account
active recovery. The performance of aerobic and anaerobic capacity, the training load from endurance type of military activities such as
and muscular endurance were unchanged and revealed no differ- marching and field exercises.
ences between the groups. Thus, the authors concluded that HIFT
might be a suitable training method to maintain fitness.
In conclusion, HIIT and HIFT can be recommended for soldiers 5. Combined strength and endurance training
mainly for its superior or similar training responses compared to
moderate-intensity endurance training but as a less time devoted Military training and operations consist of tasks that can be
training modality. In addition, for recruits and conscripts HIIT and attained through combined strength and endurance training.28
HIFT may provide an essential training stimulus that differs from Therefore, it can be concluded that combined strength and
their service-related high volume of low-intensity endurance type endurance training is the foundation of soldiers’ physical
of activity. Furthermore, from practical point of view HIIT/HIFT performance.29 The combined training may well induce pos-
may be considered an accessible and easily individualised in sol- itive training adaptations both in aerobic fitness and muscle
diers, especially, under operational and field conditions. However, strength capabilities in poorly-conditioned, overweight and inac-
when HIIT/HIFT is applied in the physical training program a spe- tive individuals.28 However, training adaptations are being
cial caution should be placed on overall physical loading to avoid compromised in more fit and active individuals. This phenomenon
overtraining. is called interference effect, which was first established by
Hickson30 The interference on optimal strength training adapta-
tions may be caused by high volumes of endurance type of activity,
4. Strength training which is a typical characteristic of military training. This combina-
tion has been shown to inhibit signalling mechanisms of protein
During increasingly physically-demanding military operations, synthesis and thus responses can be observed both at the molecu-
maximal strength and power are vital parts of modern physical lar level31,32 as well as the systemic level.33,34 Therefore, combined
training and operational readiness of soldiers.21 For optimal perfor- strength and endurance training may hamper training responses,
mance of military tasks (e.g. lifting or carrying heavy loads, casualty especially for strength development, when compared to training
drag, sprinting or climbing obstacles, patrolling in variable terrain), either exercise mode alone. The interference of combined train-
the development of strength and power should be an essential ing may be avoided or, at least, reduced by using optimal training
part of soldiers’ regular training.22 Maximal muscle strength can programming and periodisation. However, in recruits or poorly-
be improved by increasing muscle size due to a hypertrophic train- conditioned soldiers, all types of training most likely improve
ing or by increasing the role of neural factors by power training.23 physical performance without a risk for interference.
Prolonged military field training and operations have been shown Many studies have shown that the initial, typically 7- to 10-week
to lead to a decrease in muscular strength and power.24,25 standardized military BT period has positive effects on physical per-
Vantarakis et al.26 studied specific conditioning of muscle formance and body composition of the recruits,35–37 as well as on
endurance and strength among Naval Academy cadets for an 8- performance of military occupational specialties.38 Improved aer-
week study period when the experimental group participated in obic fitness and muscular strength of up to 10–15% in eight weeks
a linear periodised strength training program in addition to their have been observed, especially in recruits or conscripts with lower
daily training. The exclusive training of the experimental group levels of initial fitness.9,11,37 During the following military train-
included uni- and multilateral resistance training exercises such ing phases, nevertheless, adaptations may not have been optimal
as squats, deadlifts, lunges, bench presses, arm curls etc. Unlike in relation to total training volume, and some of the performance
the control group, the experimental group showed improvements gains may have been compromised.35,39 Therefore, physical train-
in upper and lower-body maximal strength, power, and time to ing interventions, before and during the initial military training
complete occupational obstacle course. Thus, additional strength periods, have been conducted aiming to improve optimization of
training seems to improve both physical and occupational perfor- training adaptations.
mance of navy cadets. Some studies have suggested that a preparatory physical train-
In a study of Lester et al.27 , a novel 7-week physical train- ing intervention (performed 4–8 weeks before military service) for
ing program was compared with traditional Army physical fitness recruits, may improve training adaptations for military BT while
training. The experimental training included core stability, flexibil- reducing the risk for musculoskeletal injuries.40–42 These findings
ity, resistance training, agility, speed, and power exercises, whereas are important when keeping in mind that the average aerobic fit-
the traditional army physical training group completed their nor- ness level of young men entering military service has declined along
mal fitness training including calisthenics and aerobic exercises. with a simultaneous increases in body mass.1,2 Thus, it is more
In these previously trained soldiers, greater improvements were challenging to meet the goals of military training during the ini-
observed in the experimental group for maximal strength, power tial training phases of the service. Chai et al.42 found a preparatory
and for one occupational test, namely casualty recovery time. How- 6-week physical training program beneficial in terms of aerobic
ever, similar improvements were observed for both groups in the capacity for those with a lower initial fitness level. The progressive
agility drill and vertical jump height, and pull-up performance. preparatory training consisted of 197 h of strength and endurance
It must be noted that strength training interventions in mili- training, flexibility and motor skill training, and theoretical educa-
tary environments should partly be regarded as combined training tion. The unfit recruits reached the average aerobic fitness level of
1134 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138

the study population by the end of the BT period.42 This is an impor- some studies have concentrated on physical training interventions
tant finding since it is better to execute standardised BT when there in professional soldiers, mainly in special force operators25,52,53
is less variation in the physical fitness of soldiers. and interventions on military occupational specialties, such as
A number of training intervention studies have been conducted load-carriage performance.54 Abt et al.53 studied the effects of
during the BT period. For example, Santtila et al.11,33 observed block-periodised and non-linear periodised training in Naval Spe-
improvements in maximal aerobic capacity, load carriage perfor- cial Warfare operators with 85 soldiers during 12 weeks. The
mance, and maximal strength of both upper and lower extremities experimental block training group trained with three 4-week
of conscripts during the BT period. In addition, they found that blocks starting with aerobic endurance, muscular strength and
all beneficial changes in physical performance and body com- coordination training followed by power and strength endurance
position were particularly prominent among previously inactive and mixed endurance training. The third block aimed to improve
young men. However, the strength training group did not improve power, strength, and high intensity tactical drills. The control group
strength or muscle hypertrophy to a greater extent than the aerobic trained with a non-linear periodisation program that included
intervention group or a group with normal military BT. Moreover, training increments after every two weeks. For the first block,
Hofstetter et al.36 reported that additional outdoor circuit training over the course of a week the program consisted of whole-body
induced greater increases in trunk strength and aerobic capacity, resistance training for one day, Olympic lifts and strength exer-
whereas no difference was observed in power of the upper and cises followed by short high-intensity intervals for two days, a
lower body. Furthermore, Sporis et al.43 studied the effects of two high-intensity interval strength training for one day, and a slow
different 5-week training programs on the physical fitness of mil- endurance session each for two days. The second block focused on
itary recruits. A total of 124 recruits were divided into continuous tactical-specific conditioning for two days, high-intensity interval
endurance and relative strength training (CERS) and basic military cross training for two days, and a slow endurance session for one
physical readiness training (BMPR) groups. Both groups trained day. Both groups improved maximal aerobic capacity and stand-
three times per week for 1.5 to 2 h per day. As a result, both groups ing long jump, medicine ball throw, and pull-ups. In addition, the
improved their physical readiness, but BMPR established greater experimental group improved agility runs and deadlift. On the con-
advances in some motor abilities while CERS achieved greater trary, neither group improved isokinetic maximal strength. In fact,
improvements in endurance tests. decreases were observed for upper and lower body strength in
One example of training optimization development is the U.S. experimental group, whereas the control group decreased in trunk
Army Physical Readiness Training (PRT). This training program was flexion.
based on a thorough task analysis of a soldier and aimed for a Solberg et al.52 studied the effects of block training consisting
simultaneous reduction in injuries. PRT included reduced running of a 6-month linear periodisation period followed by a 6-month
mileage, more gradually progressive periodisation and exercise non-linear periodisation period in 22 operators serving in Navy
variety and has been shown to lead to similar or improved training Special Operations Command. The training programs emphasized
adaptations and lower injury rates compared to traditional Army either strength or endurance with block periodisation including 5-
physical training.44 6 sessions per week. Linear periodisation included hypertrophic
However, in terms of physiological adaptations, conflicted find- strength training, mixed endurance training, and typical strength
ings have been observed in many studies. Additional gains in the training (4 × 5RM) followed by maximum strength training. In
measured variables were observed in some studies43 while no the non-linear periodisation, the training varied between blocks
changes or decreases in physical performance were found in other of endurance and strength training. The initial linear periodisa-
studies.11,33,45 For example, Vaara et al.46 compared the effects of tion resulted in small to moderate training adaptations (ranging
a block-periodised resistance training protocol performed twice a from −1 to +20%) followed by smaller adaptations (ranging from
week with military training over an 8-week special military train- −10 to +15%) in non-linear periodisation. However, as the authors
ing period. The intervention did not lead to improved maximal reported, even small improvements in physical fitness in soldiers
strength compared to the control group in fact, maximal strength with a high baseline level may be considered important.
of the lower extremities was reduced in both groups. It can be Military occupational specialties may largely vary depending
speculated that training frequency of two times a week was not a on military branch. To date, there are some studies available that
sufficient training stimulus for optimal muscle strength adaptions, are specifically targeted to improve these special demands. One
or that the adaptations were interfered with strenuous military of the most studied military tasks is load carriage, which is a
training that was primarily endurance type training. Nevertheless, highly relevant and required task in most of the branches of the
both groups improved their load carriage performance, measured military, especially in combat units. A meta-analysis54 combined
by 3.2 km running with a combat gear. results from ten original physical training intervention studies,
Possible explanations for the suboptimal adaptations to military which aimed to improve load-carriage performance. The authors
training include high overall training volume and unilateral pro- concluded that strength and endurance training alone had smaller
longed low-intensity endurance activity with inadequate recovery, effects with substantial variation compared to combined strength
which may lead to overtraining.47,48 The same attributes typically and endurance training, progressive load-carriage training, and
increase the risk for musculoskeletal injuries, especially in low-fit field-based training including load carriage exercises. The most
service members9,49 who are cigarette smokers.50 In addition to effective training mode to improve load-carriage performance was
low fitness level and smoking, female sex, high running mileage load-carriage exercises when they were progressively integrated as
(or mileage on foot), high body mass index, and prior injury history a part of the training program. In addition, significant training adap-
have been recognized as major risk factors for injuries in many tations were found for combined strength and endurance training,
military studies.2,51 On the other hand, the same absolute training as well as for field-based exercise such as plyometrics, agility train-
volume may be optimal for a low-fit recruit but too low for a high-fit ing, sandbag lifts, and load-carriage. Furthermore, Williams et al.55
recruit.33 The main findings of selected training adaptation studies raised concerns of carefully design of such training modality, espe-
in military environments are presented in Table 1. cially for female and low-fit soldiers.
Despite the interference effect in high-fit individuals such It has also been shown that sex differences exist in most of
as special operators, a well-design periodisation of the training the physical and military occupational performance variables,56,57
program is required for improving physical performance. Thus, which mainly remain unaltered after military BT. To date,
there exists only a few training intervention studies exclusively
 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138 1135

Table 1
Findings of previous training studies in military environment.

Study Country N Sex (personnel Training programb Results after training

group)a

Vantarakis et al.26 Greece 31 1 (2) Effect of 8-week linear periodised Bench press 1RM ↑, Squat 1RM ↑
training program on Navy Cadets Muscle endurance ↑ (push-ups,
sit-ups), 30 m sprint time ↓
Navy obstacle course time ↓

Grant et al.60 South Africa 154 1 + 2 (1) Effect of 12 and 20 weeks of VO2 max ↑ during 1st 12 weeks, ↔
medium-to-high intensity military after 20 weeks
training 2.4 km run time ↓
BMI ↔

Abt et al.53 USA 46 1 (2) Effect of 12-week block-periodised Body fat ↓, Fat mass ↓, Body mass ↓
training program in Naval Special Aerobic capacity ↑
Warfare Operators Upper body muscular endurance ↑
Upper and lower body power ↑
Total body muscular strength ↑

Solberg et al.52 Norway 22 ? (2) Assessment of novel 6-month Both programs; abdominal
linear (LP) vs. non-linear training strength, standing long jump ↑
program (NLP) in Navy Special LP; mobility, agility, upper body
Operation Forces power, pull-ups, VO2 max, muscle
mass ↑, fat percent ↓
NLP; anaerobic capacity ↑, VO2
max, upper body power ↓

Vaara et al.46 Finland 25 1 (1) Effect of added ST during 8-weeks 3.2 km load carriage (27 kg) time ↓
of special military training Isometric bench press ↔
Isometric leg press ↓, Abdominal
strength ↑, Back extension ↓

Lester et al.27 USA 133 1 (2) Effect of 7-week novel physical NT improved more bench press,
training (NT) program compared to medicine ball put, 30 m rush time,
traditional army physical fitness casualty recovery time than TT
training (TT)

Sporis et al.43 Croatia 124 1 + 2 (1) Effects of two different 5-week 3.2 km run time ↓,
training programs Muscle endurance (sit-ups,
push-ups, squats) ↑
No statistically significant
differences between programs

Sporis et al.25 Croatia 25 ? (2) Effects of a training program for Body mass, fat mass ↓
special operations battalion (SOB) Muscle endurance (sit-ups,
soldiers’ fitness parameters push-ups) ↔
Maximal leg extension, bench
press ↓
Aerobic and anaerobic
performance ↓

Santtila et al.35 Finland 57 1 (1) Effects of 8 weeks basic training, VO2 max and maximal arm and leg
followed by 8 weeks of specialised extension ↑ during 1st 8 weeks, ↔
military training after 2nd 8 weeks

Hendrickson et al.59 USA 56 2 (3) Effect of combined ST and ET on ST group ≥ Squat ↑, Bench press ↑,
tactical occupational tasks Bench press throw ↑, Repeatable
lift and carry ↑, 3.2 km load
carriage time ↓, 3.2 km run ↔

Santtila et al.11 Finland 72 1 (1) Effects of 8-week basic training (BT), VO2 max ↑ ST 12%, ET 9%, BT 13%,
ET and ST on functional parameters Body fat ↓ in all groups, leg
strength ↑ ST 9,1% and ET 12.9%

Harman et al.45 USA 32 1 (3) Effects or 8-week standardised Both training programs had the
army physical vs. weight-based same effect
training 3.2 km and 400 m load carriage
time ↓, obstacle course, sprints,
casualty rescue time ↓

Kraemer et al.29 USA 35 1 (2) Effects of concurrent 12-week All groups; push-ups ↑ (18–43%)
training, 4 days per week; ET, ST, ST + ET; sit-ups ↔
upper body strength The groups that included ET;
training + endurance training 2-mile unloaded run time ↓
(UB + ET) or combined (ET + ST) Only ET + ST and UB + ET; loaded
group 2-mile run time ↓
The groups that included RT
exercises; leg power ↑

Knapik et al. (2009)44 USA 2580 1 + 2 (1) Comparison of a standardized PRT resulted in higher fitness test
physical training and physical pass rates and lower injury rates
readiness training (PRT) compared to a traditional physical
training programs
1136 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138

Table 1 (Continued)

Study Country N Sex (personnel Training programb Results after training

group)a

Williams et al.55 UK 52 1 + 2 (1) Normal British Army 11-week Greater ↑ in the modified training
basic training with modified compared with the normal training;
physical training, which consisted Maximal box lift (12 vs. 2%)
of added ST and a higher 3.2 km loaded march performance (9
proportion of ET and material vs. 4%)
handling training compared to VO2 max (9 vs. 4%)
normal British Army basic training Dynamic lift (16 vs. 0%)
Estimated fat-free mass (4 vs. 2%)
Both genders were reported separately

Kraemer et al.58 USA 93 2 (3) Effects of 6-month ST programmes Improvements in physical performance
on physical and military in relation to specificity of training
occupational task performances ST ↑occupational performance
When compared to a male control
group, gender differences ↓ after ST,
especially for occupational tasks

Sex: 1, male; 2, female,?, not reported; Personnel group: (1), conscripts/recruits; (2), cadets/professional soldiers; (3), civilians. Abbreviations: 1RM, one repetition maximum;
VO2 max, maximal oxygen uptake; LP, linear periodization; NLP, non-linear periodization; NT, novel training; TT, traditional training; ST, strength training; ET, endurance
training; BT, basic training; UB, upper body; RT, resistance training, PRT, physical readiness training.

focused on females in military environments.58,59 Williams et al.55 of low-intensity endurance activities as a part of military training.
showed that added resistance training during 11-week military BT A gradual increase in endurance exercise intensity adds variation
improved, in relative terms, occupational performance equally in to military training and may induce greater improvements in train-
both sexes. In the same study, the female recruits improved their ing adaptations. HIIT/HIFT may effectively improve physical fitness,
maximal aerobic capacity in relation to their body mass by 18% both aerobic capacity and neuromuscular performance, with less
while the respective change in males was only 8%. time devoted to training as compared to low or moderate-intensity
In conclusion, compared to either strength or endurance train- training.15,20 Moreover, HIIT/HIFT can be considered as a practical
ing alone, combined training induces superior adaptations to training method for soldiers whenever time allocated to training
soldiers’ physical performance. Due to the physical demand of and access to fitness facilities are limited, like in field conditions.
the profession and the need for continued military readiness, it is HIIT/HIFT may even be performed in operational environments or
unavoidable to train only strength or endurance in military envi- during operations where decrements in aerobic performance have
ronment. However, several factors should be individually taken been observed. Nevertheless, its application in military environ-
into account such as the initial fitness level, training history, task ment should always be evaluated in relation to the composition
requirements, and periodisation of training. of the rest of the physical training combined with other possible
external stress factors. In addition, long-term HIIT/HIFT studies (>8
weeks) concentrating on physical performance, body composition,
6. Conclusions and practical applications
and injury incidence in the military settings are warranted.
As mentioned earlier, non-optimal adaptations to added
High volumes of low-intensity endurance training during initial
strength training during initial military training may be a result
military training phases leads to compromised training adaptations
of the interference effect. Block periodisation of strength and
and in the worst cases, musculoskeletal injuries. Particularly low-
endurance training may improve adaptations to both training
fit, inactive, overweight recruits and female sex form a risk-group
modalities, especially strength, in military environments. The plan-
in this regard. For high-fit recruits, injury risk is lower but sim-
ning of strength training blocks should be done carefully, taking
ilarly, high volume and monotony in the training stimulus leads
into account the training load from endurance type military train-
to stalling of performance, especially development of strength in
ing, such as marching and field exercises. In addition, proper
military environment. Several modifications exist to increase vari-
nutrition and time for recovery should be planned to optimise the
ation in training stimulus such as progressively increased training
effects of the strength training stimulus.60 Proper strength training
load, individualisation or more variability in training modes. Physi-
sessions might be possible to implement during theoretical educa-
cal task requirements should be the basis for goal setting in military
tion, basic shooting skills, and material handling training phases
training.
when the endurance training volume is low. Future studies are
A progressive increase in training load should be carefully
needed to elucidate whether positive strength training adaptations
planned throughout the initial training period. Progression can
can be achieved during field exercises if adequate nutrition and
only be achieved through some level of individualisation of train-
recovery are simultaneously provided.
ing. One option to adapt low-fit recruits to the physical stress of
As the number of female soldiers is increasing, more focus
military training is a preparatory training intervention before the
should be paid on optimising their physical performance in relation
actual military service. Some individualization may be achieved by
to their task requirements in military environments. Surprisingly,
dividing the recruits into groups according to their initial fitness
only a few training studies on female soldiers have been published.
level in the beginning of the BT training period. Thereafter, adjust-
Furthermore, in military training studies that use both sexes as sub-
ments can be made to the total training load by varying the volume
jects, the results should be reported by sex. This would give more
and intensity of the exercises between the groups. This method
information on the possible differences in adaptation between male
might result in improvements in the fitness of also high-fit recruits,
and female soldiers.
whose maximal aerobic capacity has been shown to even decline
In conclusion, practical recommendations should be based on
during the latter part of their military service.35 In this regard, it
the traditional nature of military training, which consists of high-
must be kept in mind that the nature of military training per se, is
volume and low-intensity endurance training with extra load of
mainly high-volume and low-intensity endurance training. Thus,
25–65 kg. Therefore, progressively increasing combined endurance
there may not be a need to implement physical training consisting
 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138 1137

and strength and power training, possibly including in some extent 24. Nindl BC, Barnes BR, Alemany JA et al. Physiological consequences of U.S. Army
high intensity interval training or microtraining, can be seen to Ranger training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39:1380–1387.
25. Sporis G, Harasin D, Bok D et al. Effects of a training program for special oper-
induce superior adaptations in soldiers’ physical performance. For ations battalion on soldiers’ fitness characteristics. J Strength Cond Res 2012;
achieving optimal physiological adaptations and, therefore, more 26:2872–2882.
effective development in physical performance, increasing atten- 26. Vantarakis A, Chatzinikolaou A, Avloniti A et al. A 2-month linear periodized
resistance exercise training improved musculoskeletal fitness and specific con-
tion should be paid to progressive and individualised training ditioning of navy cadets. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31:1362–1370.
programs and their division into phases that sequentially develop 27. Lester ME, Sharp MA, Werling WC et al. Effect of specific short-term physi-
performance. Thus, a personalised approach to performance opti- cal training on fitness measures in conditioned men. J Strength Cond Res 2014;
28:679–688.
misation should be emphasised when improving physical fitness
28. Santtila M, Pihlainen K, Viskari J et al. Optimal physical training during military
and enhanced operational readiness of soldiers. basic training period. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 11):S154–S157.
29. Kraemer WJ, Vescovi JD, Volek JS et al. Effects of concurrent resistance and aer-
obic training on load-bearing performance and the Army physical fitness test.
Acknowledgement Mil Med 2004; 169:994–999.
30. Hickson RC. Interference of strength development by simultaneously training
The authors thank Dr. Ritva Taipale for editing English. for strength and endurance. Eur J Appl Physiol 1980; 45:255–263.
31. Hawley JA. Molecular responses to strength and endurance training: are they
incompatible? Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2009; 34:355–361. Review.
References 32. Fyfe JJ, Bishop DJ, Stepto NK. Interference between concurrent resistance and
endurance exercise: molecular bases and the role of individual training vari-
1. Santtila M, Kyröläinen H, Vasankari T et al. Physical fitness profiles in ables. Sports Med 2014; 44:743–762.
young Finnish men during the years 1975–2004. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006; 33. Santtila M, Häkkinen K, Karavirta L et al. Changes in cardiovascular perfor-
38:1990–1994. mance during an 8-week military basic training period combined with added
2. Knapik J, Sharp M, Steelman RA. Secular trends in the physical fitness of United endurance or strength training. Mil Med 2008; 173:1173–1179.
States Army recruits on entry to service, 1975–2013. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 34. Ihalainen JK, Schumann M, Eklund D et al. Combined aerobic and resistance
31:2030–2052. training decreases inflammation markers in healthy men. Scand J Med Sci Sports
3. Sharp MA, Patton JF, Vogel JA, Vogel JA. A database of physically demanding tasks 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.12906. Epub ahead of print.
performed by US Army soldiers. T98-12, 1-42. Natick, MA, USA Army Research 35. Santtila M, Häkkinen K, Nindl BC et al. Cardiovascular and neuromuscular per-
Institute of Environmental Medicine Technical Report 1998; 3-10-0098. formance responses induced by 8 weeks of basic training followed by 8 weeks
4. Hauschild VD, DeGroot DW, Hall SM et al. Fitness tests and occupational tasks of of specialized military training. J Strength Cond Res 2012; 26:745–751.
military interest: a systematic review of correlations. Occup Environ Med 2017; 36. Hofstetter MC, Mäder U, Wyss T. Effects of a 7-week outdoor circuit training
74:144–153. program on Swiss Army recruits. J Strength Cond Res 2012; 26:3418–3425.
5. Tharion W, Lieberman H, Montain S et al. Energy requirements of military per- 37. Mikkola I, Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S, Jokelainen J et al. Aerobic performance
sonnel. Appetite 2005; 44:47–65. and body composition changes during military service. Scand J Prim Health Care
6. Booth CK, Probert B, Forbes-Ewan C et al. Australian army recruits in training 2012; 30:95–100.
display symptoms of overtraining. Mil Med 2006; 171:1059–1064. 38. Drain J, Billing D, Neesham-Smith D et al. Predicting physiological capacity of
7. Henning P, Park B-S, Kim J-S. Physiological decrements during sustained military human load carriage — a review. Appl Ergon 2016; 52:85–94.
operational stress. Mil Med 2011; 176:991–997. 39. Groeller H, Burley S, Orchard P et al. How effective is initial military-specific
8. Knapik JJ, Sharp MA, Canham-Chervak M et al. Risk factors for training-related training in the development of physical performance of soldiers? J Strength Cond
injuries among men and women in basic combat training. Med Sci Sports Exerc Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 11):S158–S162.
2001; 33:946–954. 40. Lee L, Kumar S, Kok WL et al. Effects of a pre-training conditioning programme
9. Rosendal L, Langberg H, Skov-Jensen A et al. Incidence of injury and physi- on basic military training attrition rates. Ann Acad Med 1997; 26:3–7.
cal performance adaptations during military training. Clin J Sport Med 2003; 41. Knapik JJ, Darakjy S, Hauret KG et al. Increasing the physical fitness of low-
13:157–163. fit recruits before basic combat training: an evaluation of fitness, injuries, and
10. Tanskanen MM, Uusitalo AL, Kinnunen H et al. Association of military train- training outcomes. Mil Med 2006; 171:45–54.
ing with oxidative stress and overreaching. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011; 42. Chai LY, Ong KC, Kee A et al. A prospective cohort study on the impact of a modi-
43:1552–1560. fied Basic Military Training (mBMT) programme based on pre-enlistment fitness
11. Santtila M, Kyröläinen H, Häkkinen K. Changes in maximal and explosive stratification amongst Asian military enlistees. Ann Acad Med 2009; 38:862–868.
strength, electromyography, and muscle thickness of lower and upper extremi- 43. Sporis G, Harasin D, Baić M et al. Effects of two different 5 weeks training pro-
ties induced by combined strength and endurance training in soldiers. J Strength grams on the physical fitness of military recruits. Coll Antropol 2014; 38(Suppl.
Cond Res 2009; 23:1300–1308. 2):157–164.
12. Courtright SH, McCormick BW, Postlethwaite BE et al. A meta-analysis of sex 44. Knapik JJ, Rieger W, Palkoska F et al. United States Army physical readiness
differences in physical ability: revised estimates and strategies for reducing training: rationale and evaluation of the physical training doctrine. J Strength
differences in selection contexts. J Appl Psychol 2013; 98:623–641. Cond Res 2009; 23:1353–1362.
13. Nindl BC, Jones BH, Van Arsdale SJ et al. Operational physical performance 45. Harman EA, Gutekunst DJ, Frykman PN et al. Effects of two different eight-week
and fitness in military women: physiological, musculoskeletal injury, and opti- training programs on military physical performance. J Strength Cond Res 2008;
mized physical training considerations for successfully integrating women into 22:524–534.
combat-centric military occupations. Mil Med 2016; 181:50–62. 46. Vaara JP, Kokko J, Isoranta M et al. Effects of added resistance training on physi-
14. Epstein Y, Yanovich R, Moran DS et al. Physiological employment standards IV: cal fitness, body composition, and serum hormone concentrations during eight
integration of women in combat units physiological and medical considerations. weeks of special military training period. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl.
Eur J Appl Physiol 2013; 113:2673–2690. 11):S168–S172.
15. Gibala MJ, Gagnon PJ, Nindl BC. Military applicability of interval training for 47. Booth CK, Probert B, Forbes-Ewan C et al. Australian army recruits in training
health and performance. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 11):S40–S45. display symptoms of overtraining. Mil Med 2006; 171:1059–1064.
16. Buchheit M, Laursen PB. High-intensity interval training, solutions to the 48. Tanskanen M, Uusitalo AL, Häkkinen K et al. Aerobic fitness, energy balance, and
programming puzzle: part I: cardiopulmonary emphasis. Sports Med 2013; body mass index are associated with training load assessed by activity energy
43:313–338. expenditure. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2009; 19:871–878.
17. Martinez-Valdes E, Falla D, Negro F et al. Differential motor unit changes 49. Taanila H, Suni JH, Kannus P et al. Risk factors of acute and overuse musculoskele-
after endurance or high-intensity interval training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2017; tal injuries among young conscripts: a population-based cohort study. BMC Mus-
49:1126–1136. culoskel Disord 2015; 16:104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0557-7.
18. Knuttgen HG, Nordesjö LO, Ollander B et al. Physical conditioning through inter- 50. Knapik J, Reynolds K, Harman E. Soldier load carriage: historical, physiological,
val training with young male adults. Med Sci Sports 1973; 5:220–226. biomedical, and medical aspects. Mil Med 2004; 169:45–56.
19. Kilen A, Hjelvang LB, Dall N et al. Adaptations to short, frequent sessions of 51. Jones BH, Knapik JJ. Physical training and exercise-related injuries: surveil-
endurance and strength training are similar to longer, less frequent exercise lance, research and injury prevention in military populations. Sports Med 1999;
sessions when the total volume is the same. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 27:111–125.
11):S46–S51. 52. Solberg PA, Paulsen G, Slaathaug OG et al. Development and implementation
20. Gist NH, Freese EC, Ryan TE et al. Effects of low-volume, high-intensity whole- of a new physical training concept in the Norwegian Navy Special Operations
body calisthenics on army ROTC cadets. Mil Med 2015; 180:492–498. Command. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 11):S204–S210.
21. Kraemer WJ, Szivak TK. Strength training for the warfighter. J Strength Cond Res 53. Abt JP, Oliver JM, Nagai T et al. Block-periodized training improves physiolog-
2012; 26(Suppl. 2):S107–S118. ical and tactically relevant performance in Naval Special Warfare Operators. J
22. Friedl KE, Knapik JJ, Häkkinen K et al. Perspectives on aerobic and strength Strength Cond Res 2016; 30:39–52.
influences on military physical readiness: report of an international military 54. Knapik JJ, Harman EA, Steelman RA et al. A systematic review of the effects
physiology roundtable. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29(Suppl. 11):S10–S23. of physical training on load carriage performance. J Strength Cond Res 2012;
23. Moritani T, deVries H. Neural factors versus hypertrophy in the time course of 26:585–597.
muscle strength gain. Am J Physiol Med 1979; 58:115–130.
1138 H. Kyröläinen et al. / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 21 (2018) 1131–1138

55. Williams A, Rayson M, Jones D. Resistance training and the enhancement of the 59. Hendrickson NR, Sharp MA, Alemany JA et al. Combined resistance and
gains in material-handling ability and physical fitness of British Army recruits endurance training improves physical capacity and performance on tactical
during basic training. Ergonomics 2002; 45:267–279. occupational tasks. Eur J Appl Physiol 2010; 109:1197–1208.
57. Wood P, Grant C, Toit P et al. Effect of mixed military training on the physical 60. Bartlett CG, Stankorb S. Physical performance and attrition among U.S. Air Force
fitness of male and female soldiers. Mil Med 2017; 182:e1771–e1779. trainees participating in the basic military training fueling initiative. Mil Med
58. Kraemer W, Mazzetti SA, Nindl BC et al. Effect of resistance training on women’s 2017; 182:e1603–e1609.
strength/power and occupational performances. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001;
33:1011–1025.