Predictive Equation for Blood Flow Restriction Training

Cirilo-Sousa, Maria do Socorro; Lemos, Jiddu Bastos; Poderoso, Rodrigo; Araújo, Ravi Cirilo Targino de; Aniceto, Rodrigo Ramalho; Pereira, Piettra Moura Galvão; Araújo, Joamira Pereira de; Lucena, Pedro Henriques Marques; Paz, Carlos Renato; Júnior, Adenilson Targino de Araújo

doi:10.1590/1517-869220192506186803

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lately, it is being used a technique to calculate and prescribe the occlusive stimulus as a percentage of the occlusion pressure of the limb to provide a more individualized prescription but always supervised by experienced professionals. The pressure can be selected based on age, gender, brachial systolic pressure and limb circumference [ 63 ]. Therefore, currently it would be advisable to use, in clinical populations, between 40% and 80% of the limb occlusion pressure [ 39 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction in Neurological Disorders: A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is scientific evidence that Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) is beneficial in healthy people, the elderly and patients with musculoskeletal disorders. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of BFR in patients with neurological disorders. The literature search was conducted up until July 2022 in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), LILACS, Scopus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Literature Complete (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO). The PEDro scale was used to analyze the methodological quality of the studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool was employed to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of seven articles were included. BFR seems to be beneficial in neurological disorders. Improvements have been found in sensorimotor function, frequency and step length symmetry, perceived exertion, heart rate and gait speed, walking endurance, fatigue, quality of life, muscles thickness, gluteus density and muscle edema. No improvements were found in lower limb strength or balance. However, results must be taken with caution due to the small number of articles and to the large heterogeneity. More clinical trials are needed. These studies should homogenize the protocols used in larger samples, as well as improve their methodological quality.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction in Neurological Disorders: A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The number of professionals in the current and the aforementioned study who prescribed pressure based on AOP values can be justified by the period in which each study was conducted. The increase in the number of scientific studies that employed the procedure [ 4 , 31 , 32 ] and the development of predictive equations with the capacity to estimate occlusion values of a limb [ 33 , 34 ] may have contributed to the increase in the number of professionals who use AOP values when prescribing the BFR technique.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application and side effects of blood flow restriction technique

Queiros

Dantas

Neto³

et al. 2021

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The physiological benefits of applying blood flow restriction (BFR) in isolation or in the presence of physical exercise have been widely documented in the scientific literature. Most investigations carried out under controlled laboratory conditions have found the technique to be safe. However, few studies have analyzed the use of the technique in clinical settings. To analyze how the BFR technique has been applied by professionals working in the clinical area and the prevalence of side effects (SEs) resulting from the use of this technique. This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 136 Brazilian professionals who perform some function related to physical rehabilitation, sports science, or physical conditioning participated in this study. Participants answered a self-administered online questionnaire consisting of 21 questions related to the professional profile and methodological aspects and SEs of the BFR technique. Professionals reported applying the BFR technique on individuals from different age groups from youth (≤18 years; 3.5%) to older adults (60–80 years; 30.7%), but mainly on people within the age group of 20 to 29 years (74.6%). A total of 99.1% of the professionals coupled the BFR technique with resistance exercise. Their main goals were muscle hypertrophy and physical rehabilitation. The majority (60.9%) of interviewees reported using BFR in durations of less than 5 minutes and the pressure used was mainly determined through the values of brachial blood pressure and arterial occlusion. Moreover, 92% of professionals declared observing at least 1 SE resulting from the BFR technique. Most professionals observed tingling (71.2%) and delayed onset of muscle soreness (55.8%). Rhabdomyolysis, fainting, and subcutaneous hemorrhaging were reported less frequently (1.9%, 3.8%, and 4.8%, respectively). Our findings indicate that the prescription of blood flow restriction technique results in minimal serious side effects when it is done in a proper clinical environment and follows the proposed recommendations found in relevant scientific literature.

show abstract