Blood flow restriction (BFR) can be used during resistance training (RT) through pressure application with pneumatic (pressurized) cuffs (PC) or non-pneumatic (practical) cuffs (NPC). However, PC are expensive and difficult to use in the gym environment compared to NPC. The main aim was to compare, correlate, and verify the hormonal and metabolic responses between PC and NPC during a low-load BFR during RT of the upper-body. The secondary aim was to compare blood lactate (BLa) concentration between pre- and post-exercise (2-min into recovery), as well as growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) concentration before, 10-min, and 15-min post exercise. Sixteen trained men randomly and alternately completed two experimental RT protocols of the upper-body : A) RT with BFR at 20% 1RM using PC (RT-BFR-PC) and (B) RT with BFR at 20% 1RM using NPC (RT-BFR-NPC) in the bench press, wide-grip lat pulldown, shoulder press, triceps pushdown, and biceps curl exercises. There was no significant difference in BLa 2-min post exercise (p=0.524), GH 10-min (p=0.843) and 15-min post exercise (p=0.672), and IGF-1 10-min (p=0.298) and 15-min post exercise (p=0.201) between RT-BFR-PC and RT-BFR-NPC. In addition, there was a moderate correlation, satisfactory ICCs, and agreement between both protocols in metabolic and hormonal responses. The experimental sessions promoted significant increases in GH and BLa, but not in IGF-1 (p<0.05). The absence of a significant difference between RT-BFR-PC and RT-BFR-NPC in metabolic and hormonal responses highlight the applicability of NPC as a low-cost and easy-to-use tool for BFR upper-body RT.

To evaluate whether body mass (BM) and body composition may influence mountain bike cycling performance. Methods: Forty male amateur mountain bikers attended the laboratory on two non-consecutive days. At the first visit, anthropometric measures (height, BM, body fat [BF], fat-free mass [FFM] and body mass index [BMI]) and familiarization to incremental cycling test were performed. On the second visit, cyclists performed again the incremental cycling test to measure peak power output (PPO), peak power output relative to BM (PPO-BM), and time to exhaustion (TE), which were posteriorly correlated with BM and anthropometric measures. Results: A moderate and strong significant correlation were observed between TE and BM (p<0.01; r=0.40) and FFM (p<0.01; r=0.56), respectively. Moderate significant correlation was found between PPO and BM (p<0.01; r=0.45), BMI (p=0.03; r=0.35) and strong with FFM (p<0.01; r=0.59). Also, PPO-BM significantly correlated with BM (p=0.04; r=-0.31), BMI (p=0.02; r=-0.35) and BF (p<0.01; r=-0.55). No other significant correlations were observed. Conclusion: Considering PPO-BM as mainly performance variable, BM and BF can be a determining factor in mountain biking performance but FFM did not.

The aims of this study were to compare muscle activity of the anterior deltoid, medial deltoid, and posterior deltoid in the bench press, dumbbell fly, shoulder press, and lateral raise exercises. Thirteen men experienced in strength training volunteered for the study. Muscle activation was recorded during maximum isometric voluntary contraction (MVIC) for data normalization, and during one set of 12 repetitions with the load of 60% 1RM in all exercises proposed. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA with Bonferroni’s posthoc was applied using a 5% significance level. For anterior deltoid, the shoulder press (33.3% MVIC) presented a significantly higher level of activation when compared to other exercises. Also, no significant difference was found between the bench press (21.4% MVIC), lateral raise (21.2% MVIC), and dumbbell fly (18.8% MVIC). For the medial deltoid, the lateral raise (30.3% MVIC) and shoulder press (27.9% MVIC) presented a significantly higher level of activity than the bench press (5% MVIC) and dumbbell fly (3.4% MVIC). Besides, no significant difference was found between the bench press and the dumbbell fly. For the posterior deltoid, the lateral raise (24% MVIC) presented a significantly higher level of activation when compared to other exercises. For the posterior deltoid portion, the shoulder press (11.4% MVIC) was significantly more active than the bench press (3.5% MVIC) and dumbbell fly (2.5% MVIC). Moreover, no significant difference was found between the bench press and the dumbbell fly. In conclusion, the shoulder press and lateral raise exercises showed a higher level of muscle activation in the anterior deltoid and medial deltoid when compared to the bench press and dumbbell fly exercises.

Direitos para esta edição cedidos à Atena Editora pelos autores. Todo o conteúdo deste livro está licenciado sob uma Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons. Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0). O conteúdo dos artigos e seus dados em sua forma, correção e confiabilidade são de responsabilidade exclusiva dos autores, inclusive não representam necessariamente a posição oficial da Atena Editora. Permitido o download da obra e o compartilhamento desde que sejam atribuídos créditos aos autores, mas sem a possibilidade de alterá-la de nenhuma forma ou utilizá-la para fins comerciais. A Atena Editora não se responsabiliza por eventuais mudanças ocorridas nos endereços convencionais ou eletrônicos citados nesta obra. Todos os manuscritos foram previamente submetidos à avaliação cega pelos pares, membros do Conselho Editorial desta Editora, tendo sido aprovados para a publicação.

Our purpose in this study was to analyze perceptual and cardiovascular responses in low-load resistance training (RT) sessions associated with a fixed non-elastic band compressed to the proximal region of the arms (p-BFR) versus a pneumatic cuff inflated to a pressure of 150 mmHg (t-BFR). Participants (16 healthy trained men) were randomly assigned to two conditions of low-load RT (20% one repetition maximum [1RM]) with BFR (p-BFR or t-BFR). In both conditions, the participants performed five exercises (4 sets/30-15-15-15) for the upper-limbs, but in one of the conditions, the exercises were performed with a p-BFR induced by a non-elastic band, while in the other, the exercises were performed with a t-BFR using a device with similar width. The devices used to generate the BFR had similar widths (5 cm). Brachial blood pressure (bBP) and heart rate (HR) were measured before, after each exercise and after the experimental session (5-, 10-, 15-, and 20 min post-session). Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and rating of pain perception (RPP) were reported after each exercise and 15 minutes post-session. HR increased during the training session in both conditions, with no differences between p-BFR and t-BFR. Neither intervention increased diastolic BP (DBP) during training, but there was a significant post-session reduction in DBP in the p-BFR, with no differences observed between conditions. There were no significant differences in RPE and RPP in the two training conditions, with both conditions associated with higher RPE and RPP at the end versus beginning of the experimental session. We conclude that when BFR device width and material are similar, low-load training with t-BFR and p-BFR promotes similar acute perceptual and cardiovascular responses in healthy trained men.