Interface pressure, perceptual, and mean arterial pressure responses to different blood flow restriction systems

Abstract

This study examined the cuff to limb interface pressure during blood flow restriction (BFR), and the perceptual and mean arterial pressure responses, in different BFR systems. Eighteen participants attended three experimental sessions in a randomised, crossover, counterbalanced design. Participants underwent inflations at 40% and 80% limb occlusive pressure (LOP) at rest and completed 4 sets of unilateral leg press exercise at 30% of one repetition maximum with BFR at 80% LOP. Different BFR systems were used each session: an automatic rapid-inflation (RI), automatic personalized tourniquet (PT) and manual handheld pump and sphygmomanometer (HS) system. Interface pressure was measured using a universal interface device with pressure sensors. Perceived exertion and pain were measured after each set, mean arterial pressure (MAP) was measured pre-, 1-minute post- and 5-minutes post-exercise. Interface pressure was lower than the set pressure in all BFR systems at rest (P < .05). Interface pressure was, on average, 10 ± 8 and 48 ± 36 mm Hg higher than the set pressure in the RI and HS system (P < .01), with no differences observed in the PT system (P > .05), during exercise. Pain and exertion were greater in sets 3 and 4 in the RI and HS system compared to the PT system (P < .05). MAP was higher in the RI and HS system compared to the PT system at 1-minute and 5-minutes post-exercise (P < .05). BFR systems applying higher pressures amplify mean arterial pressure and perceptual responses. Automatic BFR systems appear to regulate pressure effectively within an acceptable range during BFR exercise.

Comparing the Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction and Traditional Heavy Load Resistance Training in the Post-Surgery Rehabilitation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Patients: A UK National Health Service Randomised Controlled Trial

“…The PT device increases cuff pressure itself in stepwise increments, analysing the pneumatic pressure pulsations in the cuff bladder by the arterial pressure pulsations at each cuff pressure increment, and uses these characteristics to determine LOP [41]. This system is comprised of a dual-purpose easyfit variable contour nylon cuff (11.5 cm x 86 cm, 5 mm thick) connected by airtight hose tubing to a PT system, and automatically regulates pressure within acceptable limits [42]. Prior to exercise the cuff was placed on the most proximal portion of the limb and LOP was calculated in the body position that the BFR stimulus would be applied [40].…”

Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures

“…A pneumatic cuff (PTS tourniquet system, Delfi medical innovations, Vancouver, Canada) (width 13.4 cm; length 58 cm) was placed around the most proximal portion of each participant's right thigh. The pneumatic system connected to the tourniquet cuff, increased the cuff pressure in stepwise increments, and when no auscultatory pulse was detected by the Doppler probe, this determined AOP 24 . The BFR pressures used during the experimental conditions were 0%, 40%, 60% and 80% of AOP in a resting condition, which matched the body position in which the intervention was carried out 18 .…”

Strengthening the Brain—Is Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction an Effective Strategy for Cognitive Improvement?

“… Blood flow restriction system : different blood flow restriction systems (automatic pressure control vs. manual handheld pressure control) lead to diverging pressure on the limbs at rest and during exercise. However, one first investigation by Hughes et al [ 239 ] compared several blood flow restriction systems with different cuff widths. Therefore, the influence of blood flow restriction systems for inducing effective BFR-stimuli needs further investigations [ 239 ].…”

“…However, one first investigation by Hughes et al [ 239 ] compared several blood flow restriction systems with different cuff widths. Therefore, the influence of blood flow restriction systems for inducing effective BFR-stimuli needs further investigations [ 239 ].…”

“…To evoke the above mentioned cognition-related neurobiological adaptations through a resistance training with BFR, it is strongly recommended to determine a personalized cuff pressure be chosen [ 217 , 240 ] which takes the above mentioned relationships of the moderator variables and the cuff pressure into account. From a practitioner’s view, the optimal solution(s) to determine the cuff pressure ensuring an appropriate stimulus would be using a pressure that is relative to the used cuffs and individual’s characteristics [ 117 , 241 ] or to use a BFR system that automatically adjust the cuff pressure [ 239 , 240 ]. Furthermore, even moderate cuff pressures induce adaptions comparable to high cuff pressures [ 227 , 242 ].…”