Low intensity blood flow restriction exercise: Rationale for a hypoalgesia effect

Hypoalgesia and Conditioned Pain Modulation in Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Exercise

We compared the magnitude of exercise-induced hypoalgesia and conditioned pain modulation between blood-flow restriction (BFR) resistance exercise (RE) and moderate-intensity RE. Twenty-five asymptomatic participants performed unilateral leg press in two visits. For moderate-intensity RE, subjects exercised at 50% 1RM without BFR, whereas BFR RE exercised at 30% 1RM with a cuff inflated to 60% limb occlusion pressure. Exercise-induced hypoalgesia was quantified by pressure pain threshold changes before and after RE. Conditioned pain modulation was tested using cold water as the conditioning stimulus and mechanical pressure as the test stimulus and quantified as pressure pain threshold change. Difference in conditioned pain modulation pre- to post-RE was then calculated. The differences of RE on pain modulations were compared using paired t-tests. Pearson's r was used to examine the correlation between exercise-induced hypoalgesia and changes in conditioned pain modulation. We found greater hypoalgesia with BFR RE compared to moderate-intensity RE (p=0.008). Significant moderate correlations were found between exercise-induced hypoalgesia and changes in conditioned pain modulation (BFR: r=0.63, moderate-intensity: r=0.72). BFR RE has favorable effects on pain modulation in healthy adults and the magnitude of exercise-induced hypoalgesia is positively correlated with conditioned pain modulation activation.

Postoperative rehabilitation exercises with addition of blood flow restriction therapy following olecranon fracture: A case report

BACKGROUND

The addition of blood flow restriction therapy (BFRT) to exercise in patients with olecranon fracture treated surgically has not been described in the literature.

PURPOSE

To describe the effects and safety of BFRT exercises in the postoperative rehabilitation of a patient with olecranon fracture.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 27-year-old male with a surgically treated olecranon fracture completed a 12-week postoperative physical therapy programme. The assessment was performed at the start of rehabilitation, 4 and 12 weeks. The patient had elbow pain, decreased active range of motion (AROM), reduced handgrip strength, and limited physical function. The patient was treated with low-intensity resistance exercises with BFRT. The BFRT was applied with three exercises per stage, at 50% of the limb occlusion pressure and 75 repetitions per exercise. At discharge from physical therapy, improvements were observed in pain intensity (5.9-1.4 cm), AROM of elbow flexion (88°-137°) and extension (-22°--2°), AROM of forearm pronation (18°-68°) and supination (34°-78°), handgrip strength (8 kg-47 kg), physical function (22.9%-89.6%), and disability (72.7%-13.6%). These changes reached the minimal clinically important difference at the time of discharge for all measures, except for extension, pronation, and supination AROM.

CONCLUSION

The addition of BFRT to exercise was effective in improving pain, elbow, and wrist AROM, handgrip strength, function, and disability in a patient with surgically treated olecranon fracture. Despite the inherent limitations of our design, we believe these preliminary findings are compelling to warrant future investigations.

Acute hypoalgesic, neurophysiological and perceptual responses to low-load blood flow restriction exercise and high-load resistance exercise

This study compared the acute hypoalgesic and neurophysiological responses to low-load resistance exercise with and without blood flow restriction (BFR), and free-flow, high-load exercise. Participants performed four experimental conditions where they completed baseline measures of pain pressure threshold (PPT), maximum voluntary force (MVF) with peripheral nerve stimulation to determine central and peripheral fatigue. Corticospinal excitability (CSE), corticospinal inhibition and short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) were estimated with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Participants then performed low-load leg press exercise at 30% of one-repetition maximum (LL); low-load leg press with BFR at 40% (BFR40) or 80% (BFR80) of limb occlusion pressure; or high-load leg press of four sets of 10 repetitions at 70% one-repetition maximum (HL). Measurements were repeated at 5, 45 min and 24 h post-exercise. There were no differences in CSE or SICI between conditions (all P > 0.05); however, corticospinal inhibition was reduced to a greater extent (11%-14%) in all low-load conditions compared to HL (P < 0.005). PPTs were 12%-16% greater at 5 min post-exercise in BFR40, BFR80 and HL compared to LL (P ≤ 0.016). Neuromuscular fatigue displayed no clear difference in the magnitude or time course between conditions (all P > 0.05). In summary, low-load BFR resistance exercise does not induce different acute neurophysiological responses to low-load, free-flow exercise but it does promote a greater degree of hypoalgesia and reduces corticospinal inhibition more than high-load exercise, making it a useful rehabilitation tool. The changes in neurophysiology following exercise were not related to changes in PPT.

Comparison of Blood Flow Restriction Interventions to Standard Rehabilitation After an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction training (BFR-t) data are heterogeneous. It is unclear whether rehabilitation with BFR-t after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is more effective in improving muscle strength and muscle size than standard rehabilitation.

PURPOSE

To review outcomes after an ACL injury and subsequent reconstruction in studies comparing rehabilitation with and without BFR-t.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review. Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A search of English-language human clinical studies published in the past 20 years (2002-2022) was carried out in 5 health sciences databases, involving participants aged 18-65 undergoing rehabilitation for an ACL injury. Outcomes associated with muscle strength, muscle size, and knee-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were extracted from studies meeting inclusion criteria and compared.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 279 studies, of which 5 met the selection criteria. Two studies suggested that BFR-t rehabilitation after an ACL injury improved knee or thigh muscle strength and muscle size compared with rehabilitation consisting of comparable and higher load resistance training, with two studies suggesting the opposite. The single study measuring PROMs showed improvement compared to traditional rehabilitation, with no difference in muscle strength or size.

CONCLUSION

BFR-t after an ACL injury seems to benefit muscle strength, muscle size, and PROM scores compared with standard rehabilitation alone. However, only 1 large study included all these outcomes, which has yet to be replicated in other settings. Further studies utilizing similar methods with a common set of outcome measures are required to confirm the effects of BFR-t on ACL rehabilitation.

Blood flow restriction augments exercise-induced pressure pain thresholds over repetition and effort matched conditions

We sought to determine the effects of blood flow restriction (BFR) on exercise-induced hypoalgesia, specifically using low-load (LL) resistance exercise (30% 1RM) protocols that accounted for each individual's local muscular endurance capabilities. Forty-four participants completed four conditions: (1) 70% of maximal BFR repetitions with blood flow restriction (LL+BFR exercise); (2) 70% maximal BFR repetitions without LL+BFR (LL exercise); (3) 70% maximal free flow repetitions (LL+EFFORT exercise); (4) time-matched, non-exercise control (CON). Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured before and after exercise. Ischaemic pain threshold and tolerance was assessed only at post. The change in upper body PPT was greater for LL+BFR exercise compared to LL exercise [difference of 0.15 (0.35) kg/cm2], LL+EFFORT exercise [difference of 0.23 (0.45) kg/cm2], and the CON condition. The change in lower body PPT was greater for LL+BFR exercise compared to LL exercise [difference of 0.40 (0.55) kg/cm2], LL+EFFORT exercise [difference of 0.36 (0.62) kg/cm2], and the CON condition. Ischaemic pain thresholds and tolerances did not change. Submaximal exercise with BFR resulted in systemic increases in PPT but had no influence on ischaemic pain sensitivity. This effect is likely unique to BFR as we did not see changes in the effort matched free flow condition.

The Hypoalgesic Effect of Low-Load Exercise to Failure Is Not Augmented by Blood Flow Restriction

Purpose: To 1) examine whether blood flow restriction would provide an additional exercise-induced hypoalgesic response at an upper and lower limb when it is incorporated with low-load resistance exercise until failure, and 2) examine if increases in blood pressure and discomfort, with blood flow restricted exercise, would mediate the exercise-induced hypoalgesia over exercise without blood flow restriction. Methods: Forty healthy young participants completed two trials: four sets of unilateral knee extension exercise to failure at 30% of one-repetition maximum, with and without blood flow restriction. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed before (twice) and 5-min post exercise at an upper and lower limb. Blood pressure and discomfort ratings were recorded to examine mediating effects on exercise-induced hypoalgesia with blood flow restricted exercise. Results: Pressure pain threshold increased following both exercise conditions compared to a control, without any differences between exercise conditions at the upper (exercise conditions vs. control: ~0.37 kg/cm2) and lower (exercise conditions vs. control: ~0.60 kg/cm2) limb. The total number of repetitions was lower for exercise with blood flow restriction compared to exercise alone [median difference (95% credible interval) of -27.0 (-29.8, -24.4) repetitions]. There were no mediating effects of changes in blood pressure, nor changes in discomfort, for the changes in pressure pain threshold at either the upper or lower limb. Conclusion: The addition of blood flow restriction to low-load exercise induces a similar hypoalgesic response to that of non-blood flow restricted exercise, with a fewer number of repetitions.

Low-intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction for patients with claudication: A randomized controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Claudication is a common and debilitating symptom of peripheral artery disease, resulting in poor exercise performance and quality of life (QoL). Supervised exercise programs are an effective rehabilitation for patients with claudication, but they are poorly adhered to, in part due to the high pain and effort associated with walking, aerobic, and resistance exercise. Low-intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) represents an alternative exercise method for individuals who are intolerant to high-intensity protocols. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a supervised BFR program in patients with claudication.

METHODS

Thirty patients with stable claudication completed an 8-week supervised exercise program and were randomized to either BFR (n = 15) or a control of matched exercise without BFR (control; n = 15). Feasibility, safety, and efficacy were assessed.

RESULTS

All success criteria of the feasibility trial were met. Exercise adherence was high (BFR = 78.3%, control = 83.8%), loss to follow up was 10%, and there were no adverse events. Clinical improvement in walking was achieved in 86% of patients in the BFR group but in only 46% of patients in the control group. Time to claudication pain during walking increased by 35% for BFR but was unchanged for the control. QoL for the BFR group showed improved mobility, ability to do usual activities, pain, depression, and overall health at follow up.

CONCLUSION

A supervised blood flow restriction program is feasible in patients with claudication and has the potential to increase exercise performance, reduce pain, and improve QoL. (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04890275).

ADAPTations to low load blood flow restriction exercise versus conventional heavier load resistance exercise in UK military personnel with persistent knee pain: protocol for the ADAPT study, a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Muscle atrophy, muscle weakness and localised pain are commonly reported following musculoskeletal injury (MSKI). To mitigate this risk and prepare individuals to return to sport or physically demanding occupations, resistance training (RT) is considered a vital component of rehabilitation. However, to elicit adaptations in muscle strength, exercise guidelines recommend lifting loads ≥ 70% of an individual's one repetition maximum (1-RM). Unfortunately, individuals with persistent knee pain are often unable to tolerate such high loads and this may negatively impact the duration and extent of their recovery. Low load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) is an alternative RT technique that has demonstrated improvements in muscle strength, hypertrophy, and pain in the absence of high mechanical loading. However, the effectiveness of high-frequency LL-BFR in a residential rehabilitation environment remains unclear. This study will compare the efficacy of high frequency LL-BFR to 'conventional' heavier load resistance training (HL-RT) on measures of physical function and pain in adults with persistent knee pain.

METHODS

This is a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 150 UK service personnel (aged 18-55) admitted for a 3-week residential rehabilitation course with persistent knee pain. Participants will be randomised to receive: a) LL-BFR delivered twice daily at 20% 1-RM or b) HL-RT three-times per week at 70% 1-RM. Outcomes will be recorded at baseline (T1), course discharge (T2) and at three-months following course (T3). The primary outcome will be the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) at T2. Secondary outcomes will include patient reported perceptions of pain, physical and occupational function and objective measures of muscle strength and neuromuscular performance. Additional biomechanical and physiological mechanisms underpinning both RT interventions will also be investigated as part of a nested mechanistic study.

DISCUSSION

LL-BFR is a rehabilitation modality that has the potential to induce positive clinical adaptations in the absence of high mechanical loads and therefore could be considered a treatment option for patients suffering significant functional deficits who are unable to tolerate heavy load RT. Consequently, results from this study will have a direct clinical application to healthcare service providers and patients involved in the rehabilitation of physically active adults suffering MSKI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.org reference number, NCT05719922.

[Blood flow restriction training as a treatment option for lateral elbow tendinopathy-a study presentation]

Blood flow restriction training, developed in 1966 in Japan, is a training modality that utilizes partial arterial and complete venous blood flow occlusion. Combined with low load resistance training, it aims to induce hypertrophy and strength gains. This makes it particularly suitable for people recovering from injury or surgery, for whom the use of high training loads is unfeasible. In this article, the mechanism behind blood flow restriction training and its applicability for the treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy is explained. An ongoing prospective, randomized, controlled trial on the treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy is presented.

Low-Intensity Blood Flow Restriction Exercises Modulate Pain Sensitivity in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review

Low-intensity exercise with blood flow restriction (LIE-BFR) has been proposed as an effective intervention to induce hypoalgesia in both healthy individuals and patients with knee pain. Nevertheless, there is no systematic review reporting the effect of this method on pain threshold. We aimed to evaluate the following: (i) the effect of LIE-BFR on pain threshold compared to other interventions in patients or healthy individuals; and (ii) how different types of applications may influence hypoalgesic response. We included randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of LIE-BFR alone or as an additive intervention compared with controls or other interventions. Pain threshold was the outcome measure. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro score. Six studies with 189 healthy adults were included. Five studies were rated with 'moderate' and 'high' methodological quality. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity, quantitative synthesis could not be performed. All studies used pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) to assess pain sensitivity. LIE-BFR resulted in significant increases in PPTs compared to conventional exercise at local and remote sites 5 min post-intervention. Higher-pressure BFR results in greater exercise-induced hypoalgesia compared to lower pressure, while exercise to failure produces a similar reduction in pain sensitivity with or without BFR. Based on our findings, LIE-BFR can be an effective intervention to increase pain threshold; however, the effect depends on the exercise methodology. Further research is necessary to investigate the effectiveness of this method in reducing pain sensitivity in patients with pain symptomatology.

Effects of blood flow restriction on spine postural control using a robotic platform: A pilot randomized cross-over study

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training improves muscle strength and functional outcomes, but the proprioceptive implications of this technique in the rehabilitation field are still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed at assessing the effects of BFR in terms of stabilometric and balance performance.

METHODS

In this pilot randomized cross-over study, healthy young adults were included and randomly assigned to Groups A and B. Both groups underwent a postural assessment with and without wearing a BFR device. Study participants of Group A underwent postural baseline assessment wearing BFR and then removed BFR for further evaluations, whereas subjects in Group B performed the baseline assessment without BFR and then with BFR. Stabilometric and balance performance were assessed by the robotic platform Hunova, the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), the self-reported perceived balance (7-point Likert scale), and discomfort self-rated assessment. Moreover, the safety profile was recorded.

RESULTS

Fourteen subjects were included and randomly assigned to Group A (n: 7) and Group B (n: 7). Significant differences were shown in balance tests in static conditions performed on the Hunova robot platform in terms of average distance RMS (root-mean-square) with open eyes (OE), anteroposterior (AP) trunk oscillation range with OE, mediolateral (ML) average speed of oscillation with OE, and total excursion AP range with closed eyes (CE) (BFR: 3.44 ± 1.06; without BFR: 2.75 ± 0.72; p= 0.041). Moreover, elastic balance test showed differences in Romberg index (BFR: 0.16 ±0.16; without BFR: 0.09 ± 0.07; p= 0.047). No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, our data showed that BFR affects balance performance of healthy subjects. Further studies are needed to better characterize the possible role of BFR treatment in the context of a specific rehabilitation protocol.

The effectiveness and safety of blood flow restriction training for the post-operation treatment of distal radius fracture

INTRODUCTION

Distal radius fracture (DRF) is a common injury in the upper extremities. Blood flow restriction (BFR) has been proven to be effective in improving function in low-load training, which is suitable for post-op rehabilitation. We explored the effectiveness and safety of BFR therapy in DRF patients who underwent surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned to either the BFR or the regular training (RT; no BFR therapy) groups. All patients completed the same 4-week postoperative rehabilitation program, including anti-inflammatory treatments, strengthening and range of motion (ROM) training. In the BFR group, the pressure was 120 mmHg in strengthening training course. Pain, circumferences of wrists and forearms, ROM, muscle strength, and D-dimer levels were evaluated at weeks 0, 2, and 4. Radius union scoring system (RUSS) was measured at weeks 4 and 12. Finally, wrist functionality (Cooney modification) was evaluated at week 12.

RESULTS

The BFR group had significantly decreased pain levels compared with the RT group (p < 0.01, effect size= 2.33, -2.44 at weeks 2 and 4). Swelling was effectively relieved in both groups. The wrist swelling was less in the BFR group (p < 0.01, effect size = -2.17 at week 4). The isometric strength of wrist extension (p < 0.01, effect size = 1.5, 3.02 at weeks 2 and 4), flexion (p < 0.01, effect size = 1.33, 2.53 at weeks 2 and 4), and functionality significantly increased in the BFR group (p < 0.01, effect size = 2.80 at week 12). No risk of VT in the BFR group was found. BFR did not threaten bone healing.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with DRF who underwent corrective surgery, BFR therapy effectively relieved pain and swelling, increased muscle strength and wrist function, and had no additional risks for bone healing and VT.

Low-Load Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction Is Effective for Managing Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LLRT-BFR) when compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Forty-six patients with LET were randomly assigned to a LLRT-BFR or a LLRT with sham-BFR treatment group. All patients received soft tissue massage, supervised exercises with BFR or sham intervention (twice a week for 6 weeks), advice, and a home exercise program. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) score, pain-free grip strength, and global rating of change, measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Between-group differences were evaluated using mixed-effects models with participant-specific random effects for continuous data. Global rating of change was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Statistically significant between-group differences were found in favor of LLRT-BFR compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in pain intensity at 12-week follow-up (-1.54, 95% CI: -2.89 to -0.18; P = .026), pain-free grip strength ratio at 6-week follow-up (0.20, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.34; P = .005), and PRTEE at 6- and 12-week follow-up (-11.92, 95% CI: -20.26 to -3.59; P = .006, and -15.23, 95% CI: -23.57 to -6.9; P<.001, respectively). At 6- and 12-weeks, patients in the LLRT-BFR group had greater odds of reporting complete recovery or significant improvement (OR = 6.0, OR = 4.09, respectively). CONCLUSION: Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction produced significantly better results compared to the LLRT with sham-BFR for all primary outcomes. Considering the clinically significant between-group improvement in function (>11 points in PRTEE) and the better success rates in the LLRT-BFR group, this intervention may improve recovery in LET. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(12):803-825. Epub: 14 September 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11211.

Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training in Tendon Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review on Intervention Parameters, Physiological Effects, and Outcomes

Objective

To identify current evidence on blood flow restriction training (BFRT) in tendon injuries and healthy tendons, evaluating physiological tendon effects, intervention parameters, and outcomes.

Methods

This scoping review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Databases searched included MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, EMBase, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane library (Controlled trials, Systematic reviews), and five trial registries. Two independent reviewers screened studies at title/abstract and full text. Following screening, data was extracted and charted, and presented as figures and tables alongside a narrative synthesis. Any study design conducted on adults, investigating the effects of BFRT on healthy tendons or tendon pathology were included. Data were extracted on physiological tendon effects, intervention parameters and outcomes with BFRT.

Results

Thirteen studies were included, three on tendinopathy, two on tendon ruptures, and eight on healthy Achilles, patellar, and supraspinatus tendons. A variety of outcomes were assessed, including pain, function, strength, and tendon morphological and mechanical properties, particularly changes in tendon thickness. BFRT intervention parameters were heterogeneously prescribed.

Conclusion

Despite a dearth of studies to date on the effects of BFRT on healthy tendons and in tendon pathologies, preliminary evidence for beneficial effects of BFRT on tendons and clinical outcomes is encouraging. As BFRT is a relatively novel method, definitive conclusions, and recommendations on BFRT in tendon rehabilitation cannot be made at present, which should be addressed in future research, due to the potential therapeutic benefits highlighted in this review.

Exercise With Low-Loads and Concurrent Partial Blood Flow Restriction Combined With Patient Education in Females Suffering From Gluteal Tendinopathy: A Feasibility Study

Introduction

To date, there exists no gold standard conservative treatment for lateral hip pain due to tendinopathy of the gluteus medius and/or minimus tendon (GT), a condition often complicated by pain and disability. Higher loads during everyday activities and exercise seems to be contraindicated with GT. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of exercise with low-loads concurrent partial blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) and patient education for patients present GT.

Methods

Recruitment took place at three hospitals in the Central Denmark Region. The intervention consisted of daily sessions for 8 weeks with one weekly supervised session. From week three patients exercised with applied partial blood flow restriction by means of a pneumatic cuff around the proximal thigh of the affected leg. Throughout the intervention patients received patient education on their hip condition. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were collected at baseline. The feasibility of LL-BFR was conducted by adherence to the exercise protocol and drop-out rate. Patient reported outcome measures (The Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Gluteal Questionnaire, EuroQol - 5 Dimensions-Visual Analogue Scale, Oxford Hip Score, Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score), maximal voluntary isometric hip abduction-, hip extension, and knee extension strength (Nm/kg) measured using a handheld dynamometer, and functional capacity tests (30 second chair-stand test and a stair-climb test) was conducted as secondary outcomes.

Results

Sixteen women with a median (IQR) age of 51 (46–60) years were included. Median (IQR) Body Mass Index was 26.69 (23.59–30.46) kg/m2. Adherence to the total number of training sessions and the LL-BFR was 96.4 and 94.4%, respectively. Two patients dropped out due to (i) illness before initiation of LL-BFR and (ii) pain in the affected leg related to the LL-BFR-exercise. At follow-up both pain levels and patient-reported outcome measures improved. Isometric hip abduction-, hip extension-, and knee extension strength on both legs and functional performance increased. Conclusion: LL-BFR-exercise seems feasible for treatment of GT. At follow-up, a high adherence and low drop-out rate were observed. Further, patients reported clinically relevant reductions in pain, and showed significant increases in isometric hip and knee strength.

Wrist, but Not Back, Isometric Contraction Induced Widespread Hypoalgesia in Healthy Participants

Objective: Exercise may reduce pain sensitivity. This phenomenon called exercise-induced hypoalgesia is observed in different types of exercises and involves the activation of endogenous pain modulation systems. Although the effect of limb exercise on pain sensitivity has often been tested, few studies explored the impact of back exercises that are often used to treat low back pain. The main objective is to measure the effect of back-muscle exercise on pain sensitivity and compare it to the effect of a limb-muscle exercise.

Methods: Twenty-three participants who were pain-free performed a 4-min wrist flexion isometric contraction followed by a 4-min low back extension, separated by a 20-min break. Pressure pain thresholds were tested at two low back (S1 spinous process, lumbar erector spinae muscle) and two wrist (capitate bone, wrist flexor muscles) sites before and after each exercise. For each exercise, sites were considered as remote or local in relation to the muscles contracted during the exercise. An independent sample of 11 participants was recruited to confirm the influence of low back extension on pain sensitivity.

Results: Wrist exercise induced a larger increase in pain sensitivity than back exercise at the remote site. Only wrist exercise induced a hypoalgesia effect at both the local and the remote sites. Back exercise induced a similar effect in the independent sample.

Conclusions: This study showed that back and wrist exercises induced a distinct effect on pain sensitivity in participants who were pain-free. The wrist exercise induced a systemic reduction in pain sensitivity (locally and remotely), whereas the back exercise did not. This differential effect may be present because wrist exercise induced most fatigue compared with the back exercise.

Blood Flow Restriction Enhances Rehabilitation and Return to Sport: The Paradox of Proximal Performance

The use of blood flow restriction (BFR) within rehabilitation is rapidly increasing as further research is performed elucidating purported benefits such as improved muscular strength and size, neuromuscular control, decreased pain, and increased bone mineral density. Interestingly, these benefits are not isolated to structures distal to the occlusive stimulus. Proximal gains are of high interest to rehabilitation professionals, especially those working with patients who are limited due to pain or postsurgical precautions. The review to follow will focus on current evidence and ongoing hypotheses regarding physiologic responses to BFR, current clinical applications, proximal responses to BFR training, potential practical applications for rehabilitation and injury prevention, and directions for future research. Interestingly, benefits have been found in musculature proximal to the occlusive stimulus, which may lend promise to a greater variety of patient populations and conditions. Furthermore, an increasing demand for BFR use in the sports world warrants further research for performance research and recovery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, expert opinion.

Hypoalgesia following isometric handgrip exercise with and without blood flow restriction is not mediated by discomfort nor changes in systolic blood pressure

The purpose was to examine the effect of isometric handgrip exercise with and without blood flow restriction on exercise-induced hypoalgesia at a local and non-local site, and its underlying mechanisms. Sixty participants (21 males & 39 females, 18-35 years old) completed 3 trials: four sets of 2-minute isometric handgrip exercise at 30% of maximum handgrip strength; isometric handgrip exercise with blood flow restriction at 50% of arterial occlusion pressure; and a non-exercise time-matched control. Pain thresholds increased similarly in both exercise conditions at a local (exercise conditions: ~0.45 kg/cm², control: ~-0.04 kg/cm²) and non-local site (exercise conditions: ~0.37 kg/cm², control: ~-0.16 kg/cm²). Blood flow restriction induced greater feelings of discomfort compared to exercise alone [median difference (95% credible interval) of 4.5 (0.5, 8.6) arbitrary units]. Blood pressure increased immediately after exercise (systolic: 10.3 mmHg, diastolic: 7.7 mmHg) and decreased in recovery. There was no within participant correlation between changes in discomfort and pressure pain threshold. A bout of isometric handgrip exercise with or without blood flow restriction can provide exercise-induced hypoalgesia at a local and non-local site. However, discomfort and changes in systolic blood pressure do not explain this response.

Aerobic exercise with blood flow restriction causes local and systemic hypoalgesia and increases circulating opioid and endocannabinoid levels

This study examined the effect of aerobic exercise with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) on exercise-induced hypoalgesia and endogenous opioid and endocannabinoid systems. In a randomized crossover design, pain-free individuals performed 20 min of cycling in four experimental trials: 1) low-intensity aerobic exercise (LI-AE) at 40% V̇o_2max; 2) LI-AE with low-pressure BFR (BFR40); 3) LI-AE with high-pressure BFR (BFR80); and 4) high-intensity aerobic exercise (HI-AE) at 70% V̇o_2max. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were assessed before and 5 min postexercise. Circulating concentrations of beta-endorphin and 2-arachidonoylglycerol were assessed before and 10 min postexercise. In the exercising legs, postexercise PPTs were increased following BFR40 and BFR80 compared with LI-AE (23-32% vs. 1-2% increase, respectively). The increase in PPTs was comparable to HI-AE (17-20% increase) with BFR40 and greater with BFR80 (30-32% increase). Both BFR80 and HI-AE increased PPTs in remote areas of the body (increase of 26-28% vs. 19-21%, respectively). Postexercise circulating beta-endorphin concentration was increased following BFR40 (11%) and HI-AE (14%), with the greatest change observed following BFR80 (29%). Postexercise circulating 2-arachidonoylglycerol concentration was increased following BFR40 (22%) and BFR80 (20%), with the greatest change observed following HI-AE (57%). Addition of BFR to LI-AE can trigger both local and systemic hypoalgesia that is not observed follow LI-AE alone and activate endogenous opioid and endocannabinoid systems of pain inhibition. Compared with HI-AE, local and systemic hypoalgesia following LI-AE with high-pressure BFR is greater and comparable, respectively. LI-AE with BFR may help pain management in load-compromised individuals.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We have shown that performing blood flow restriction (BFR) during low-intensity aerobic exercise can trigger local and systemic hypoalgesia, which is not typically observed with this intensity of exercise. High-pressure BFR triggers greater and comparable hypoalgesia than high-intensity aerobic exercise in the exercising limbs and remote areas of the body, respectively. Performing BFR during low-intensity aerobic exercise activates the opioid and endocannabinoid systems, providing novel insight into potential mechanisms of hypoalgesia with BFR exercise.

Hypoalgesic effects of a blood flow restriction technique at moderate intensity with or without motor imagery: a single-blind randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The main objective was to assess the hypoalgesic effect of adding blood flow restriction (BFR) training with or without motor imagery (MI) to moderate-intensity exercise. The secondary objective was to analyse the correlations of the pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) regarding perceived pain intensity, perceived fatigue, and cuff pressure discomfort.

METHODS

A sample of 42 asymptomatic participants were randomly assigned to 3 groups: control group (CG), BFR group, and BFR with MI group. All participants performed a squat exercise at an intensity of 60% of 1RM. For the BFR groups, blood occlusion occurred at 80% of maximal arterial occlusive pressure. Local, bilateral, and distal PPT were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and 48 h post-intervention. The perceived fatigue was assessed post-intervention, and pain intensity was assessed only 48 h post-intervention.

RESULTS

There were intragroup differences in the CG and BFR + MI group in the local PPT between the pre-intervention and post-intervention measurements (p = 0.039, d= -0.32 and p = 0.009, d= -0.46, respectively) and only in the CG in the bilateral PPT (p = 0.002, d= -0.41). The CG and BFR group showed significant differences at 48 h post-intervention, with a decrease in local PPT (p = 0.009, d = 0.51 and p = 0.049, d = 0.43, respectively) and bilateral PPT (p = 0.004, d = 0.53 and p = 0.021, d = 0.46, respectively). There was a negative moderate correlation between local PPT at the post-intervention time and perceived discomfort of the occlusion device only in the BFR group (r=-0.54, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Moderate-intensity resistance training with high occlusion did not generate hypoalgesia but did appear to generate a hyperalgesic response within 48 h after the intervention.

Current Techniques Used for Practical Blood Flow Restriction Training: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Bielitzki, R, Behrendt, T, Behrens, M, and Schega, L. Current techniques used for practical blood flow restriction training: a systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 35(10): 2936-2951, 2021-The purpose of this article was to systematically review the available scientific evidence on current methods used for practical blood flow restriction (pBFR) training together with application characteristics as well as advantages and disadvantages of each technique. A literature search was conducted in different databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) for the period from January 2000 to December 2020. Inclusion criteria for this review were (a) original research involving humans, (b) the use of elastic wraps or nonpneumatic cuffs, and (c) articles written in English. Of 26 studies included and reviewed, 15 were conducted using an acute intervention (11 in the lower body and 4 in the upper body), and 11 were performed with a chronic intervention (8 in the lower body, 1 in the upper body, and 2 in both the upper and the lower body). Three pBFR techniques could be identified: (a) based on the perceptual response (perceived pressure technique), (b) based on the overlap of the cuff (absolute and relative overlap technique), and (c) based on the cuffs' maximal tensile strength (maximal cuff elasticity technique). In conclusion, the perceived pressure technique is simple, valid for the first application, and can be used independently of the cuffs' material properties, but is less reliable within a person over time. The absolute and relative overlap technique as well as the maximal cuff elasticity technique might be applied more reliably due to markings, but require a cuff with constant material properties over time.

Time to Save Time: Beneficial Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training and the Need to Quantify the Time Potentially Saved by Its Application During Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation

The main goal of musculoskeletal rehabilitation is to achieve the pre-injury and/or pre-surgery physical function level with a low risk of re-injury. Blood flow restriction (BFR) training is a promising alternative to conventional therapy approaches during musculoskeletal rehabilitation because various studies support its beneficial effects on muscle mass, strength, aerobic capacity, and pain perception. In this perspective article, we used an evidence-based progressive model of a rehabilitative program that integrated BFR in 4 rehabilitation phases: (1) passive BFR, (2) BFR combined with aerobic training, (3) BFR combined with low-load resistance training, and (4) BFR combined with low-load resistance training and traditional high-load resistance training. Considering the current research, we propose that a BFR-assisted rehabilitation has the potential to shorten the time course of therapy to reach the stage where the patient is able to tolerate resistance training with high loads. The information and arguments presented are intended to stimulate future research, which compares the time to achieve rehabilitative milestones and their physiological bases in each stage of the musculoskeletal rehabilitation process. This requires the quantification of BFR training-induced adaptations (eg, muscle mass, strength, capillary-to-muscle-area ratio, hypoalgesia, molecular changes) and the associated changes in performance with a high measurement frequency (≤1 week) to test our hypothesis. This information will help to quantify the time saved by BFR-assisted musculoskeletal rehabilitation. This is of particular importance for patients, because the potentially accelerated recovery of physical functioning would allow them to return to their work and/or social life earlier. Furthermore, other stakeholders in the health care system (eg, physicians, nurses, physical therapists, insurance companies) might benefit from that with regard to work and financial burden.

Editorial Commentary: Blood Flow Restriction Therapy Continues to Prove Effective

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training continues to look promising to try and maintain muscle mass or to rebuild muscle mass and strength after injury or surgery. Because additional potential benefits include pain control, increased gene expression (leading to atrophy reduction), and muscle excitation, our use of the modality favors earlier over middle- or late-phase postoperative use. We initiate BFR therapy 2-14 days postoperatively, often with reduced cuff pressure in the first several sessions before increasing to the recommended therapeutic occlusion level. We have observed the greatest benefit for individuals who are non-weight-bearing for 6 to 8 weeks and who may have more postoperative restrictions due to the nature of the surgery. Compared with the opposite thigh, we have seen instances in which quadriceps girth has been preserved, although not increased, following the non-weight-bearing period. Ideally, we use 1 to 3 low-load resistance training exercises per session at least 2 times per week for 6 weeks. We also employ BFR following osteotomy or any procedure where bone drilling is used, as researchers have observed improved bone health. Additional benefits relevant to the early postoperative phase, such as effusion and pain reduction, have not been clearly established. Anecdotally, we have seen effusion levels temporarily increase during treatment but then resolve to baseline within 30 to 60 minutes of tourniquet deflation. Further high-level research is necessary to objectively validate BFR use and which patients may best benefit from it.

Voice perturbations under the stress overload in young individuals: phenotyping and suboptimal health as predictors for cascading pathologies

Verbal communication is one of the most sophisticated human motor skills reflecting both-the mental and physical health of an individual. Voice parameters and quality changes are usually secondary towards functional and/or structural laryngological alterations under specific systemic processes, syndrome and pathologies. These include but are not restricted to dry mouth and Sicca syndromes, body dehydration, hormonal alterations linked to pubertal, menopausal, and andropausal status, respiratory disorders, gastrointestinal reflux, autoimmune diseases, endocrinologic disorders, underweight versus overweight and obesity, and diabetes mellitus. On the other hand, it is well-established that stress overload is a significant risk factor of cascading pathologies, including but not restricted to neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and cancers. Our current study revealed voice perturbations under the stress overload as a potentially useful biomarker to identify individuals in suboptimal health conditions who might be strongly predisposed to associated pathologies. Contextually, extended surveys applied in the population might be useful to identify, for example, persons at high risk for respiratory complications under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19. Symptoms of dry mouth syndrome, disturbed microcirculation, altered sense regulation, shifted circadian rhythm, and low BMI were positively associated with voice perturbations under the stress overload. Their functional interrelationships and relevance for cascading associated pathologies are presented in the article. Automated analysis of voice recordings via artificial intelligence (AI) has a potential to derive digital biomarkers. Further, predictive machine learning models should be developed that allows for detecting a suboptimal health condition based on voice recordings, ideally in an automated manner using derived digital biomarkers. Follow-up stratification and monitoring of individuals in suboptimal health conditions are recommended using disease-specific cell-free nucleic acids (ccfDNA, ctDNA, mtDNA, miRNA) combined with metabolic patterns detected in body fluids. Application of the cost-effective targeted prevention within the phase of reversible health damage is recommended based on the individualised patient profiling.

The effect of blood flow restriction exercise on exercise-induced hypoalgesia and endogenous opioid and endocannabinoid mechanisms of pain modulation

This study aimed to investigate and compare the magnitude of exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) with low-intensity blood flow restriction (BFR) resistance exercise (RE) at varying pressures to other intensities of resistance exercise and examine endogenous mechanisms of pain reduction. Twelve individuals performed four experimental trials involving unilateral leg press exercise in a randomized crossover design: low-load RE at 30% of one repetition maximum (1RM), high-load RE (70% 1RM), and BFR-RE (30% 1RM) at a low and high pressure. BFR pressure was prescribed relative to limb occlusion pressure at 40% and 80% for the low- and high-pressure trials. Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) were assessed before and 5 min and 24 h following exercise in exercising and nonexercising muscles. Venous blood samples were collected at the same timepoints to determine plasma concentrations of beta-endorphin and 2-arachidonoylglycerol. High-pressure BFR-RE increased PPTs in the exercising limb to a greater extent than all other trials. Comparable systemic EIH effects were observed with HLRE and both BFR-RE trials. PPTs in the exercising limb remained elevated above baseline at 24 h postexercise following both BFR-RE trials. Postexercise plasma beta-endorphin concentration was elevated during the BFR-RE trials. No changes to 2-arachidonoylglycerol concentration were observed. High pressure BFR-RE causes a greater EIH response in the exercising limb that persists for up to 24 h following exercise. The reduction in pain sensitivity with BFR-RE is partly driven by endogenous opioid production of beta-endorphin. BFR-RE should be investigated as a possible pain-modulation tool in individuals with acute and chronic pain.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY High-pressure blood flow restriction (BFR) causes a greater hypoalgesia response in the exercising limb (48%) compared with light and heavy load resistance exercise (10–34%). Performing light load resistance exercise with BFR causes systemic hypoalgesia comparable with heavy load resistance exercise (10–18%). BFR resistance exercise prolonged the exercise-induced hypoalgesia response for 24 h in the exercising limb (15% and 24%, respectively). Activation of endogenous opioid production and a conditioned pain modulation effect partly mediate the relationship between exercise and hypoalgesia.