Blood flow restriction during self-paced aerobic intervals reduces mechanical and cardiovascular demands without modifying neuromuscular fatigue

Blood-Flow Restriction Is Associated With More Even Pacing During High-Intensity Cycling

PURPOSE

This study examined the influence of blood-flow restriction (BFR) on the distribution of pace, physiological demands, and perceptual responses during self-paced cycling.

METHODS

On separate days, 12 endurance cyclists/triathletes were instructed to produce the greatest average power output during 8-minute self-paced cycling trials with BFR (60% arterial occlusion pressure) or without restriction (CON). Power output and cardiorespiratory variables were measured continuously. Perceived exertion, muscular discomfort, and cuff pain were recorded every 2 minutes.

RESULTS

Linear regression analysis of the power output slope was statistically significant (ie, deviated from the intercept) for CON (2.7 [3.2] W·30 s-1; P = .009) but not for BFR (-0.1 [3.1] W·30 s-1; P = .952). Absolute power output was ∼24% (12%) lower at all time points (P < .001) during BFR compared with CON. Oxygen consumption (18% [12%]; P < .001), heart rate (7% [9%]; P < .001), and perceived exertion (8% [21%]; P = .008) were reduced during BFR compared with CON, whereas muscular discomfort (25% [35%]; P = .003) was greater. Cuff pain was rated as "strong" (5.3 [1.8] au; 0-10 scale) for BFR.

CONCLUSION

Trained cyclists adopted a more even distribution of pace when BFR was applied compared with a negative distribution during CON. By presenting a unique combination of physiological and perceptual responses, BFR is a useful tool to understand how the distribution of pace is self-regulated.

Potential considerations with estimating blood flow restriction pressure in the lower body using a narrower cuff

Blood flow restriction pressures are typically set as a percentage of the arterial occlusion pressure. For those who do not have the ability to measure the arterial occlusion pressure, estimation equations are available. However, notable considerations are needed when estimating pressure with a narrow cuff (5 cm) in the lower body. A previously published equation in this journal was developed but was created only using 55% of the sample because the arterial occlusion of the others could not be obtained within the manufacturer's pressure limit. The purpose of this article was twofold: (1) to investigate how previous studies have implemented the equation and (2) to highlight potential concerns of using this equation. Two databases were used to locate articles that used the equation from Loenneke et al. (2015). We found that this equation had been cited 10 times to estimate arterial occlusion pressure with some notable concerns. Some did not use a 5 cm wide cuff, while others used it for participants who had arterial occlusion pressures exceeding 300 mmHg. To highlight the latter, we also applied the Loenneke et al. (2015) lower body equation to participants with arterial occlusion pressures known to exceed 300 mmHg to demonstrate potential concerns. This retrospective analysis found that 52% of the sample with known pressures over 300 mmHg (40 out of 77) would be estimated below 300 mmHg. This paper highlighted important considerations for those trying to estimate arterial occlusion pressure in the lower body with a narrow cuff (5 cm).

BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTED WALKING ALTERS GAIT KINEMATICS

HIGHLIGHTS

Applying blood flow restriction changes walking kinematics, causing an overall increase in anterior trunk flexion and knee flexion during stance while simultaneously reducing plantar-flexion angle at toe-off and ankle joint velocity.Applying blood flow restriction exacerbate exercise-related sensations of exertion and discomfort.Sample site does not influence the level of post-exercise blood lactate or markers of cell-membrane potential and damage.

Blood flow restriction during high-intensity interval cycling exacerbates psychophysiological responses to a greater extent in females than males

This study aimed to characterize neuromuscular, perceptual, and cardiorespiratory responses to high-intensity interval training (HIIT) with superimposed blood flow restriction in males and females. Twenty-four, healthy individuals (n = 12 females) completed two cycling HIIT protocols to task failure (1-min work phases at 90% of peak power output interspersed by 1-min rest phases). The blood flow restriction (BFR) and control (CON) protocols were identical except for the presence and absence of BFR during rest phases, respectively. The interpolated twitch technique, including maximal voluntary isometric knee extension (MVC) and femoral nerve electrical stimuli, was performed at baseline, every six intervals, and task failure. Perceptual and cardiorespiratory responses were recorded every three intervals and continuously during exercise, respectively. Bayesian inference was used to obtain the joint posterior distribution for all parameters and evidence of an effect was determined via the marginal posterior probability (PP). The BFR shortened task duration by 57.3% compared with CON (PP > 0.99), without a sex difference. The application of BFR exacerbated the rate of decline in neuromuscular measures (MVC and twitch force output), increase of perceptual responses (perceived effort, pain, dyspnea, fatigue), and development of cardiorespiratory parameters (minute ventilation and heart rate), compared with CON (PP > 0.95). In addition, BFR exacerbated the neuromuscular, perceptual, and cardiorespiratory responses to a greater extent in females than males (PP > 0.99). Our results suggest that superimposition of blood flow restriction exacerbates psychophysiological responses to a HIIT protocol to a greater extent in females than males.NEW & NOTEWORTHY To our knowledge, no study has explored sex differences in the neuromuscular, perceptual, and cardiorespiratory indices characterizing exercise tolerance during high-intensity interval training (HIIT) with blood flow restriction (BFR) applied only during rest periods. Our results suggest that BFR elicited a decline in exercise performance that could be attributed to integration of psychophysiological responses. However, this integration was sex-dependent where females demonstrated an exacerbated rate of change in these responses compared with males.

Self-Paced Cycling at the Highest Sustainable Intensity With Blood Flow Restriction Reduces External but Not Internal Training Loads

Purpose: This study compared training loads and internal:external load ratios from an aerobic interval session at the highest perceptually sustainable intensity with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Methods: On separate days, 14 endurance cyclists/triathletes completed four 4-minute self-paced aerobic cycling intervals at their highest sustainable intensity, with and without BFR (60% of arterial occlusion pressure). Internal training load was quantified using 3 training impulses (TRIMP; Banister, Lucia, and Edwards) and sessional ratings of perceived exertion. External load was assessed using total work done (TWD). Training load ratios between all internal loads were calculated relative to TWD. Results: Lucia TRIMP was lower for the BFR compared with non-BFR session (49 [9] vs 53 [8] arbitrary units [au], P = .020, dz = −0.71). No between-conditions differences were observed for Banister TRIMP (P = .068), Edwards TRIMP (P = .072), and training load in sessional ratings of perceived exertion (P = .134). The TWD was lower for the BFR compared with non-BFR session (223 [52] vs 271 [58] kJ, P < .001, dz = −1.27). Ratios were greater for the BFR session compared with non-BFR for Lucia TRIMP:TWD (0.229 [0.056] vs 0.206 [0.056] au, P < .001, dz = 1.21), Edwards TRIMP:TWD (0.396 [0.105] vs 0.370 [0.088] au, P = .031, dz = 0.66), and training load in sessional ratings of perceived exertion:TWD (1.000 [0.266] vs 0.890 [0.275] au, P = .044, dz = 0.60), but not Banister TRIMP:TWD (P = .306). Conclusions: Practitioners should consider both internal and external loads when monitoring BFR exercise to ensure the demands are appropriately captured. These BFR-induced changes were reflected by the Lucia TRIMP:TWD and Edwards TRIMP:TWD ratio, which could be used to monitor aerobic BFR training loads. The Lucia TRIMP:TWD ratio likely represents BFR-induced changes more appropriately compared with ratios involving either Edwards or Banister TRIMP.