Pilot selection anthropometry a comparison with measures taken by a single avmo- smith

2,255 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,255
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
21
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Pilot selection anthropometry a comparison with measures taken by a single avmo- smith

  1. 1. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Pilot selection anthropometry Dr Adrian Smith 16 AVN BDE / AVMED MAJ (Dr) Sue Steele Army Aviation Training Centre
  2. 2. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Sitting height limit: Kiowa 92-95 cm
  3. 3. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  4. 4. Sources of differences • Growth • Diurnal variation • Repeatability – Inter-observer – Intra-observer • Technique* – Measurement technique – Posture – Equipment – Training Differences up to 2 cm normal. • Mistake/error – unintended, random • Bias – systematic distortion RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  5. 5. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine The present study • Army Aviation Centre, Oakey • Single experienced AVMO • 56 student pilots • Anthropometry measurement (“Measured”) – Stature, sitting height, BKL, BHL • Recruit medical examination (“Recorded”) • De-identified. • Analysed at AVMED
  6. 6. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Stature 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 Stature (cm), Measured Stature(cm),Recorded Aircrew Data Linear (Perfect Match) Linear (+/-2 cm) Linear (+/-5 cm) Correlation 0.881
  7. 7. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  8. 8. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Sitting Height 80 85 90 95 100 105 80 85 90 95 100 105 Sitting Height (cm), Measured SittingHeight(cm),Recorded Aircrew Data Linear (Perfect Match) Linear (+/-2 cm) Linear (+/-5 cm) Correlation 0.705
  9. 9. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  10. 10. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Buttock-Knee Length 50 55 60 65 70 75 50 55 60 65 70 75 Buttock-Knee Length (cm), Measured Buttock-KneeLength(cm), Recorded Aircrew Data Linear (Perfect Match) Linear (+/-2 cm) Linear (+/-5 cm) Correlation 0.768
  11. 11. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Buttock-Heel Length 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 Buttock-Heel Length (cm), Measured Buttock-HeelLength(cm), Recorded Aircrew Data Linear (Perfect Match) Linear (+/-2 cm) Linear (+/-5 cm) Correlation 0.588
  12. 12. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Difference Stature Sitting Height Buttock-Heel Buttock-Knee <2 cm 91% 53% 53% 68% 2-5 cm 9% 27% 31% 25% >5 cm 0 20% 16% 7%
  13. 13. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Measure Mean difference (cm) Range (cm) Over-recording (cm) Under-recording (cm) Stature 0.68±1.5 -2 to 5 1.75±0.83 -1.12±0.3 Sitting Height -2.50±3.0 -8 to 3 1.47±0.71 -3.90±2.5 Buttock-Heel Length -1.50±3.5 -12 to 7 1.77±1.47 -4.07±2.4 Buttock-Knee Length -0.29±2.8 -8 to 6 2.39±1.57 -2.87±1.9
  14. 14. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 Recruiting Location Percentofsittingheightsmeasureds Difference 2-5 cm Difference >5 cm
  15. 15. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 Recruiting Location Percentofsittingheightsmeasureds Difference 2-5 cm Difference >5 cm Military Health Facilities DFRCs
  16. 16. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Correlation of measurements Parameter Mil Centres DFRCs Stature 0.926 0.943 Sitting Height 0.588 0.845 Buttock-heel length 0.730 0.812 Buttock-knee length 0.428 0.725
  17. 17. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Parameter Location Under-recorded (cm) p Stature DFR Centre -0.07±1.3 <0.05 Military Centre -1.33±1.5 Sitting Height DFR Centre -2.71±2.5 <0.05 Military Centre -4.63±2.3 Buttock-Heel Length DFR Centre -1.54±4.4 0.87 Military Centre -1.75±3.4 Buttock-Knee Length DFR Centre -0.04±3.3 0.15 Military Centre -1.36±1.7
  18. 18. Is the difference consistent? What happens when you get close to an anthropometric limit? RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  19. 19. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  20. 20. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Under-recorded (cm) Relative Difference (cm) p Sitting Height ≤98 cm Military Centre -3.3±3.2 -2.0 0.03 DFRC -1.4±2.6 Sitting Height >98 cm Military Centre -5.6±1.9 -4.9 0.01 DFRC -0.7±2.1 Under-recorded (cm) Relative Difference (cm) p Military Centre Sitting Height ≤98cm -3.3±3.2 -2.3 0.03 Sitting Height >98cm -5.6±1.9 DFR Centre Sitting Height ≤98cm -1.4±2.6 -0.6 0.31 Sitting Height >98cm -0.7±2.1
  21. 21. • “But they may have grown.” RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  22. 22. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Sitting height, 12 months 2008-2009 n Under-recorded (cm) p Range Military Centre 20 -5.28±2.1 <0.001 -8 to 0 DFR Centre 14 -1.43±0.79 -3 to 0
  23. 23. “Growth”: it doesn’t add up Stature ≈ sitting height + buttock-heel length1 Group-mean differences • Sitting Height 2.5 cm (grown) • Buttock-heel length 1.5 cm (grown) but • Stature 0.7 cm (slightly smaller) RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine 1 Not quite, but close enough.
  24. 24. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Summary • Differences in anthropometric measures – Frequent – Large (>5 cm) – Aeromedically significant • Sitting height most affected – Critical dimension for current aircraft
  25. 25. Summary • Current system of anthropometry – Not reliable – Inaccurate – May not inform the pilot-selection process. • DFRCs more accurate than some ADF facilities. • Some centres better than others. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  26. 26. Summary • Pattern of differences – SH, BHL >> ST – Under-recording error > over-recording – Magnitude greater close to anthro limit – Military > DFRC • Unlikely due to: – Diurnal variation – Growth – Random Error RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  27. 27. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Possible explanations • Staff – Untrained – Inexperienced – Competency, proficiency • Primitive equipment • Non-standard facilities / room layout • Candidate advocacy?
  28. 28. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine What can be done? • Formal training in anthropometry – For those engaged in measuring pilots • QA, maintenance of competency, proficiency • Standardised anthropometry – Equipment – Layout • ? Centralised anthropometry
  29. 29. Centralisation • Advantages – Equipment – Training – Experience • ? Location – Demographics – Geographics – Logistics – Training • ‘Hubbing’? • DFRC-only anthro? RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine
  30. 30. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Which tool?
  31. 31. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Take-home message • Anthropometry – Is important. – Can directly affect flight safety. – Needs to be done accurately. • It is easy to measure pilots, • but hard to measure them well. – Trained, experienced staff – Proper equipment
  32. 32. RAAF Institute of Aviation Medicine Thank you. Questions / Discussion Dr Adrian Smith adrian.smith14@defence.gov.au Ph: 08 7383 3169

×