Effects of strength training with blood flow restriction on torque, muscle activation and local muscular endurance in healthy subjects

Sousa, J.P.; Neto, Gabriel Rodrigues; Santos, Hellen Bandeira de Pontes; Araújo, Joamira Pereira de; Silva, H G; Cirilo-Sousa, Maria S.

doi:10.5114/biolsport.2017.63738

Cited by 38 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(85 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…From the remaining 1413 unique studies, 1334 were excluded through title-abstract assessment, 63 studies following full-text reading, and one eligible study was excluded as data were in-obtainable. 32 Consequently, a total of 16 eligible studies [33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] were included in the present meta-analysis ( Figure 1, Table S1).…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of blood‐flow restricted vs heavy‐load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Grønfeldt

Nielsen

Mieritz

et al. 2020

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Heavy‐load strength training (HLT) is generally considered the Gold Standard exercise modality for inducing gains in skeletal muscle strength. However, use of heavy external exercise loads may be contraindicative in frail individuals. Low‐load resistance exercise combined with partial blood‐flow restriction (LL‐BFR exercise) may offer an effective alternative for increasing mechanical muscle strength and size. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of LL‐BFR training to HLT on maximal muscle strength gains. Prospero registration‐id (CRD42014013382). Materials and methods A systematic search in six healthcare science databases and reference lists was conducted. Data selected for primary analysis consisted of post‐intervention changes in maximal muscle strength. A random‐effects meta‐analysis with standardized mean differences (SMD) was used. Results Of 1413 papers identified through systematic search routines, sixteen papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, totalling 153 participants completing HLT and 157 completing LL‐BFR training. The magnitude of training‐induced gains in maximal muscle strength did not differ between LL‐BFR training and HLT (SMD of −0.17 (95% CI: −0.40; 0.05)). Low between‐study heterogeneity was noted (I2 = 0.0%, Chi2 P = 9.65). Conclusion Low‐load blood‐flow‐restricted training appears equally effective of producing gains in maximal voluntary muscle strength compared to HLT in 20‐ to 80‐year‐old healthy and habitually active adults.

show abstract

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of blood‐flow restricted vs heavy‐load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Grønfeldt

Nielsen

Mieritz

et al. 2020

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The training load in each group has been adjusted according to the 1RM test [19] . The load during quadriceps exercises in the conventional group was standardized to 60% of the estimated 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) and the load in the BFR group was standardized to 30% of the 1-RM associated with BFR [20] .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This exercise was done using ankle weights and progressed to a knee extension machine based on the patient's tolerance with intervals of three to five minutes between attempts. The 1RM test was performed as a pre-test and the training load is then adjusted accordingly [19] . These criteria were based on the protocol of a previous study by the American college of sports medicine [22] .…”

Section: One-repetition Maximum (1-rm) Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Low Load Resistance Blood Flow Restriction Training on Knee Osteoarthritis

Abdallah¹,

MOHAMMED

2018

The Medical Journal of Cairo University

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The initiation, progression, and severity of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been associated with decreased muscular strength and alterations in joint biomechanics. Resistance exercise has been shown to be an effective intervention for decreasing pain, restoring muscle strength and joint mechanics while improving physical function in patients with knee OA. High-resistance exercise has been demonstrated to be more beneficial than low-resistance exercise. However, patients with knee OA may have reduced tolerance of high resistance training programs.

show abstract

“…Scientific evidence has shown the importance of low-load training with BFR in increasing muscle strength 3,7 , muscle hypertrophy 3,7 , localized muscle resistance 8 and functional capacity 9 . In addition, it has been demonstrated that this method is safe in relation to hemodynamics 10,11 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, a safe and effective form, considered to be the good alternative for evaluating the BFR point and prescribing the pressure to be used in training, is the technique proposed in Laurentino et al 3 . This procedure consists of BFR verification by means of a vascular Doppler, with the individual lying in the supine position 3,8,11 . However, the vast majority of exercises are performed in different positions (sitting or standing), and because gravitational force causes direct variations in hemodynamics when the individual changes his position 17 , establishing the BFR point in a lying position is a limiting factor when proposing the performance of exercises in other positions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are there differences in auscultatory pulse in total blood flow restriction between positions, limbs and body segments?

Neto

Silva

Umbelino

et al. 2018

Rev. Bras. Cineantropom. Desempenho Hum.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Verification of the auscultatory pulse in total blood flow restriction (BFR) has been a limiting factor in studies due to the way in which it is evaluated and prescribed, as hemodynamic measurements can be directly affected by gravity. The aim of the present study was to compare the auscultatory pulse in BFR between positions, genders, limbs and body segments in healthy young individuals. A total of 156 subjects participated in the study, 76 of whom were male and 80 of whom were female (23.9±3.7 years, 66.5±11.5 kg, 1.67±0.07 m). After filling in registration data, anthropometry was evaluated, and BFR pressure was determined. BFR was evaluated in a randomized manner in both limbs (upper and lower) and in both segments (right and left) in the following positions: a) lying in the supine position; B) sitting with knees and trunk at 90°; and c) standing in the anatomical position. Significant differences were observed between the lying, sitting and standing positions (p<0.05), between genders (p<0.05), between limbs (p<0.05) and between the right and left segments in the lower limb in both genders [males (p=0.014) and females (p=0.009)] in the lying position. However, no significant differences were observed between the right and left segments in the upper limbs (p>0.05). The BFR point appears to differ between positions, genders, lower limbs and segments. Therefore, it is recommended that health professionals should check the BFR point in the position relating to the exercise that will be performed, taking into account gender, lower limbs and body segments.

show abstract

Effects of strength training with blood flow restriction on torque, muscle activation and local muscular endurance in healthy subjects

Cited by 38 publications

References 38 publications

Effect of blood‐flow restricted vs heavy‐load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Effect of blood‐flow restricted vs heavy‐load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Effect of Low Load Resistance Blood Flow Restriction Training on Knee Osteoarthritis

Are there differences in auscultatory pulse in total blood flow restriction between positions, limbs and body segments?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About