Comparison of Different Variants of the U.S. Army Occupational Physical Assessment Test

Abstract

Introduction: The U.S. Army Occupational Physical Assessment Test (OPAT) is a pre-enlistment physical employment screening assessment developed to place recruits and soldiers into Military Occupational Specialties (MOSs) based on their physical capabilities in order to optimize performance and limit injury. The OPAT consists of the seated power throw (SPT), strength deadlift (SDL), standing long jump, and interval aerobic run. During the scientific validation of the OPAT, two variants of the SPT and two variants of the SDL were used. Although the OPAT was validated using both variants for each test, U.S. Army scientists and policymakers have received queries regarding how these variants compare to each other. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare different variants of the SPT and SDL.

Materials and methods: Thirty-two participants (14 male and 18 female) between the ages of 18 and 42 years visited the laboratory on one occasion and performed two variants of the SPT (seated on the ground [the current OPAT standard] versus seated in a chair with a 35 cm seat height) and two variants of the SDL (using a hex-bar [the current OPAT standard] versus using paired dumbbells). Testing order for the different variants was randomized. The protocol was approved by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command Institutional Review Board.

Results: Performing the SPT from a chair significantly (P < .05) increased performance when compared to performing the SPT from the ground (5.4 ± 1.3 m versus 5.0 ± 1.4 m, respectively). Values for the two SPT variants were correlated (tau = 0.90). Performing the SDL using the hex-bar significantly increased the maximal weight lifted when compared to performing the SDL using paired dumbbells (86.9 ± 18.4 kg versus 83.1 ± 18.0 kg, respectively). Values for the two SDL variants were correlated (tau = 0.83).

Conclusions: Performing different variants of the SPT and SDL influenced the resulting score. Although these findings do not alter the administration or scoring of the OPAT, they do provide a valuable reference in the event of future inquiries regarding the development of the OPAT.