Is there rationale for the cuff pressures prescribed for blood flow restriction exercise? A systematic review

Comparing adaptations from blood flow restriction exercise training using regulated or unregulated pressure systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

No study has examined outcomes derived from blood flow restriction exercise training interventions using regulated compared with unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, we used a systematic review and meta-analyses to compare the chronic adaptations to blood flow restriction exercise training achieved with regulated and unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems.

DATA SOURCES

The electronic database search included using the tool EBSCOhost and other online database search engines. The search included Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Embase and SpringerLink.

METHODS

Included studies utilised chronic blood flow restriction exercise training interventions greater than two weeks duration, where blood flow restriction was applied using a regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure system, and where outcome measures such as muscle strength, muscle size or physical function were measured both pre- and post-training. Studies included in the meta-analyses used an equivalent non-blood flow restriction exercise comparison group.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Data showed that regulated (n = 47) and unregulated (n = 34) blood flow restriction pressure systems yield similar training adaptations for all outcome measures post-intervention. For muscle strength and muscle size, this was reaffirmed in the included meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

This review indicates that practitioners may achieve comparable training adaptations with blood flow restriction exercise training using either regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, additional factors such as device quality, participant comfort and safety, cost and convenience are important factors to consider when deciding on appropriate equipment to use when prescribing blood flow restriction exercise training.

Physiological and clinical effects of low-intensity blood-flow restricted resistance exercise compared to standard rehabilitation in adults with knee osteoarthritis-Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease with high socioeconomical costs. In Denmark, standard rehabilitation (SR) consists of a combination of patient education and supervised physical exercise involving a standardized neuromuscular training program. As an evidence-based alternative, high-load (>70% 1RM) resistance training (HIRT) has shown positive rehabilitation effects in knee-OA but may not be tolerated in all patients (~25%) due to knee joint pain. However, low-load resistance training (20-40% 1RM) with concurrent partial blood-flow restriction (BFR) appears to produce effects similar to HIRT yet involving reduced joint pain during and after exercise. The aim is to examine the effect of low-load BFR training compared to SR on pain, thigh muscle mass and muscle function in adults with knee-OA. We hypothesize that 12 weeks of BFR will lead to superior improvements in pain, muscle mass and mechanical muscle function compared to SR.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

90 participants diagnosed with radiographic knee-OA will be randomized to either BFR or SR twice a week for 12 weeks. BFR will consist of two selected lower limb strength exercises performed with an inflated pneumatic occlusion cuff. Intervention procedures in SR consist of a full 8 weeks GLA:D course followed by 4 weeks of team group training. Primary outcome variable is the change in KOOS-Pain subscale from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcome variables are changes in pain sensitivity, functional performance, muscle mass and mechanical muscle function. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses will be conducted. One-way analysis of variance will be performed to evaluate between-group changes. Pre-to-post intervention comparisons will be analyzed using a mixed linear model. Regression analysis will be performed to evaluate potential associations between selected outcome variables.

Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, blood flow restriction (BFR) with low-load resistance training (BFR-RT) was compared with high-load resistance training (HL-RT) on muscle strength in healthy adults. The characteristics of cuff pressure suitable for muscle strength gain were also investigated by analyzing the effects of applying different occlusion pressure prescriptions and cuff inflation patterns on muscle strength gain. Methods: Literature search was conducted using PubMed, Ovid Medline, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify literature published until May 2023. Studies reporting the effects of BFR-RT interventions on muscle strength gain were compared with those of HL-RT. The risk of bias in the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane tool, followed by a meta-analysis to calculate the combined effect. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore the beneficial variables. Results: Nineteen articles (42 outcomes), with a total of 458 healthy adults, were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect showed higher muscle strength gain with HL-RT than with BFR-RT (p = 0.03, SMD = -0.16, 95% CI: -0.30 to -0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the BFR-RT applied with incremental and individualized pressure achieved muscle strength gain similar to the HL-RT (p = 0.8, SMD = -0.05, 95% CI: -0.44 to 0.34; p = 0.68, SMD = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.23 to 0.15), but muscle strength gain obtained via BFR-RT applied with absolute pressure was lower than that of HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.71 to -0.19). Furthermore, muscle strength gain obtained by BFR-RT applied with intermittent pressure was similar to that obtained by HL-RT (p = 0.88, SMD = -0.02, 95% CI: -0.27 to 0.23), but muscle strength gain for BFR-RT applied with continuous pressure showed a less prominent increase than that for HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = -0.3, 95% CI: -0.48 to -0.11). Conclusion: In general, HL-RT produces superior muscle strength gains than BFR-RT. However, the application of individualized, incremental, and intermittent pressure exercise protocols in BFR-RT elicits comparable muscle strength gains to HL-RT. Our findings indicate that cuff pressure characteristics play a significant role in establishing a BFR-RT intervention program for enhancing muscle strength in healthy adults. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails; Identifier: PROSPERO (CRD42022364934).

Blood Flow Restriction in Oncological Patients: Advantages and Safety Considerations

BACKGROUND

Cancer, being a highly widespread disease on a global scale, has prompted researchers to explore innovative treatment approaches. In this regard, blood flow restriction has emerged as a promising procedure utilized in diverse clinical populations with favorable results including improvements in muscle strength, cardiovascular function, and postoperative recovery. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of blood flow restriction in cancer survivors.

METHODS

An investigation was carried out using various databases until February 2023: PubMed, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Plus, SPORTDiscus, Physiotherapy and Podiatry of the Complutense University of Madrid, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Research Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Literature Complete Journal Storage, and the gray literature. To assess the methodological quality of the studies, the PEDro scale was utilized, and the Cochrane Collaboration tool was employed to evaluate the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Five articles found that blood flow restriction was beneficial in improving several factors, including quality of life, physical function, strength, and lean mass, and in reducing postoperative complications and the length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Blood flow restriction can be a viable and effective treatment option. It is important to note that the caution with which one should interpret these results is due to the restricted quantity of articles and significant variation, and future research should concentrate on tailoring the application to individual patients, optimizing load progression, ensuring long-term follow-up, and enhancing the methodological rigor of studies, such as implementing sample blinding.

Blood Flow Restriction Is Not Useful as Soccer Competition Recovery in Youth Male National-Level Soccer Players: A Crossover Randomised Controlled Trial

In soccer, blood flow restriction (BFR) is used to optimise between-match recovery. However, the benefits are unclear. This study evaluated the effects of BFR as a recovery strategy after a competition on countermovement jump (CMJ) height, rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and the wellness of soccer players. Forty national-level soccer players were allocated into two conditions: BFR (an active recovery session wearing a BFR device, 24 h after a competition) or NoBFR (the same recovery without BFR). CMJ, RPE and wellness were evaluated the day (CMJ and RPE) or the morning (wellness) before the competition; just after the competition (CMJ and RPE); and 24, 48 (wellness) and 72 h later. After 4 weeks, the players changed conditions. All players showed impaired CMJ (p = 0.013), RPE (p < 0.001) and wellness (p < 0.001) after the match compared with the baseline. The CMJ returned to the baseline 24 h later and wellness returned 48 h later. Only in the BFR condition did the RPE remain impaired 24 h after the match, which was also the moment after finishing the BFR recovery session (p < 0.001). BFR during active recovery does not provide any additional benefits compared with traditional exercise modalities to recover CMJ, RPE and wellness in youth national-level soccer players. BFR could even induce an immediate higher RPE.

Effects of Sex and Cuff Pressure on Physiological Responses during Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Exercise in Young Adults

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the physiological responses resulting from an acute blood flow restriction resistance exercise bout with two different cuff pressures in young, healthy men and women.

METHODS

Thirty adults (18-30 yr) completed a bilateral leg extension blood flow restriction bout consisting of four sets (30-15-15-15 repetitions), with cuffs applied at pressures corresponding to 40% and 60% of the minimum arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) needed to completely collapse the femoral arteries. During each of these conditions (40% and 60% AOP), physiological measures of near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and EMG amplitude (EMG AMP) were collected from the dominant or nondominant vastus lateralis. After each set, ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were collected, whereas only at baseline and at the end of the bout, mean arterial pressure (MAP) was assessed. Separate mixed-factorial ANOVA models were used to examine mean differences in the change in EMG AMP and NIRS parameters during each set. The absolute RPE and MAP values were also examined with separate ANOVAs. A P value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Regardless of sex or cuff pressure, the change in EMG AMP was lower in set 1 (14.8%) compared with the remaining sets (22.6%-27.0%). The 40% AOP condition elicited the greatest changes in oxy[heme] and deoxy[heme], while also providing lower RPEs. For MAP, there was an effect for time such that MAP increased from preexercise (87.5 ± 4.3 mm Hg) to postexercise (104.5 ± 4.1 mm Hg).

CONCLUSIONS

The major findings suggested that the 40% AOP condition permitted the greatest amount of recovery during the interset rest. In addition, there did not seem to be any meaningful sex-related difference in this sample of young healthy adults.

The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of lower limb garment-integrated blood flow restriction training in healthy adults

OBJECTIVES

Explore the feasibility of lower-limb garment-integrated BFR-training.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Human performance laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthy males with no experience of BFR-training.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility was determined by a priori thresholds for recruitment, adherence, and data collection. Safety was determined by measuring BFR torniquet pressure and the incidence of side effects. Efficacy was determined by measuring body anthropometry and knee isokinetic dynamometry. Feasibility and safety outcomes were reported descriptively or as a proportion with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), with mean change, 95% CIs, and effect sizes for efficacy outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve participants (mean age 24.8 years [6.5]) were successfully recruited; 11 completed the study. 134/136 sessions were completed (adherence = 98.5%) and 100% of data were collected. There was one event of excessive pain during exercise (0.7%, 95% CI 0.0%, 4.0%), two events of excessive pain post-exercise (1.5%, 95% CI 0.4%, 5.5%), and one event of persistent paraesthesia post-exercise (0.7%, 95% CI 0.0%, 4.0%). Mean maximal BFR torniquet pressure was <200 mmHg. We observed an increase in knee extension peak torque (mean change 12.4 Nm), but no notable changes in body anthropometry.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower-limb garment-integrated BFR-training is feasible, has no signal of important harm, and could be used independently.

Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction on Functionality, Quality of Life and Pain in Patients with Neuromusculoskeletal Pathologies: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction is characterized as a method used during exercise at low loads of around 20-40% of a repetition maximum, or at a low-moderate intensity of aerobic exercise, in which cuffs that occlude the proximal part of the extremities can partially reduce arterial flow and fully restrict the venous flow of the musculature in order to achieve the same benefits as high-load exercise.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this systematic literature review was to analyze the effects of BFR intervention on pain, functionality, and quality of life in subjects with neuromusculoskeletal pathologies.

METHODS

The search to carry out was performed in PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, PEDro, CINHAL, SPORTDiscus, Trip Medical Database, and Scopus: "kaatsu" OR "ischemic training" OR "blood flow restriction" OR "occlusion resistance training" OR "vascular occlusion" OR "vascular restriction".

RESULTS

After identifying 486 papers and eliminating 175 of them due to duplication and 261 after reading the title and abstract, 50 papers were selected. Of all the selected articles, 28 were excluded for not presenting a score equal to or higher than 6 points on the PEDro scale and 8 for not analyzing the target outcome variables. Finally, 14 papers were selected for this systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

The data collected indicate that the blood flow restriction tool is a therapeutic alternative due to its effectiveness under different exercise modalities. The benefits found include decreases in pain thresholds and improvement in the functionality and quality of life of the neuro-musculoskeletal patient during the first six weeks. However, the results provided by this tool are still not clear for medium- and long-term interventions.

A Comparison between High and Low Cuff Pressures on Muscle Oxygen Saturation and Recovery Responses Following Blood-Flow Restriction Resistance Exercise

The aim of the study was to compare the recovery response and muscle oxygenation of a blood-flow restriction resistance exercise (BFR) session with high [HP: 80% of the arterial occlusion pressure (AOP)] and low cuff pressure (LP: 40% of AOP). Both exercise sessions included 4 sets to failure at the barbell preacher curl exercise. Twelve resistance trained men (27.4 ± 5.0 years; 83.5 ± 11.6 kg; 176.6 ± 7.0 cm) performed each protocol in a counterbalanced, randomized order. Maximal isometric force, muscle morphology and muscle soreness of the biceps brachii muscle were assessed at baseline, 15-min, 60-min and 24-h post each testing session. In addition, muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2) was assessed during each training session. A lower number of repetitions (p = 0.013) was detected in HP compared to LP. A lower SmO2 (p < 0.001) was detected in the recovery time between the sets in HP (mean: 47.6 ± 15.7%) compared to LP (mean: 68.9 ± 7.2%). No differences between the two trials (p > 0.05) were noted for isometric force, muscle architecture and soreness at any timepoint. Results indicate that, despite a high cuff pressure may induce a more hypoxic condition compared to a lower cuff pressure, recovery responses may not be affected.

Effect of low-intensity exercise with blood flow restriction during rest intervals on muscle function and perception

PURPOSE

We assessed the effects of low-intensity exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) during rest intervals on recovery of muscle function and pain during exercise and rest intervals.

METHODS

Participants were 10 males, and study arms of the participants were randomly assigned into three conditions; low-intensity exercise with BFR during rest intervals (rBFR), low-intensity exercise with BFR during exercise (eBFR) and low-intensity exercise only (EO). The exercise task was elbow flexion until repetition failure at 30% of 1 RM, and cuff pressure was 120 mmHg. The maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) and the muscle endurance (ME) were measured pre, post, 1 h, 24 h and 48 h after the exercise. Pain during exercise and rest intervals were evaluated using Numerical Rating Scale.

RESULTS

MVIC and ME significantly decreased after exercise in all conditions. Pain during exercise was lower in rBFR (4.2 ± 2.9) (p = 0.007) and EO (4.4 ± 2.7) (p = 0.014) conditions compared to eBFR condition (6.7 ± 1.7), but the pain during rest intervals was more intense in rBFR condition (5.2 ± 1.6) compared to eBFR (1.5 ± 1.4) and EO (1.7 ± 1.2) conditions (all: p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We discovered that recovery of muscle function was the same as BFR during rest intervals and BFR during exercise. Also, our results suggested that BFR itself may cause the perception of pain. Future studies are thus required to investigate the optimal dosage focusing on the pressure volume and intensity used in BFR during intervals. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Is There a Minimum Effective Dose for Vascular Occlusion During Blood Flow Restriction Training?

Background

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training at lower exercise intensities has a range of applications, allowing subjects to achieve strength and hypertrophy gains matching those training at high intensity. However, there is no clear consensus on the percentage of limb occlusion pressure [%LOP, expressed as a % of the pressure required to occlude systolic blood pressure (SBP)] and percentage of one repetition max weight (%1RM) required to achieve these results. This review aims to explore what the optimal and minimal combination of LOP and 1RM is for significant results using BFR.

Method

A literature search using PubMed, Scopus, Wiley Online, Springer Link, and relevant citations from review papers was performed, and articles assessed for suitability. Original studies using BFR with a resistance training exercise intervention, who chose a set %LOP and %1RM and compared to a non-BFR control were included in this review.

Result

Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. %LOP ranged from 40 to 150%. %1RM used ranged from 15 to 80%. Training at 1RM ≤20%, or ≥ 80% did not produce significant strength results compared to controls. Applying %LOP of ≤50% and ≥ 80% did not produce significant strength improvement compared to controls. This may be due to a mechanism mediated by lactate accumulation, which is facilitated by increased training volume and a moderate exercise intensity.

Conclusion

Training at a minimum of 30 %1RM with BFR is required for strength gains matching non-BFR high intensity training. Moderate intensity training (40-60%1RM) with BFR may produce results exceeding non-BFR high intensity however the literature is sparse. A %LOP of 50-80% is optimal for BFR training.

The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of upper limb garment-integrated blood flow restriction training in healthy adults

Background

Blood flow restriction training (BFR) has been demonstrated to increase muscle hypertrophy and strength, but has logistical and cost barriers. Garment-integrated BFR has the potential to reduce these barriers by lowering equipment demands and cost. The primary aim of the study was to explore the feasibility of garment-integrated BFR in the upper limb of healthy adults, with a secondary aim of exploring safety and efficacy.

Methods

Physically active and otherwise healthy participants with no previous experience with BFR were sought. Eligible participants completed a five-week garment-integrated BFR programme that involved completing two sessions per week. Feasibility was determined by a priori defined thresholds for recruitment, adherence to the garment-integrated BFR programme, and data collection. Safety was determined by recording adverse events and by monitoring for total arterial occlusion pressure using a fingertip pulse oximeter. Efficacy was determined by measuring push-ups to volitional failure, arm girth, and number of prescribed repetitions completed. Feasibility and safety outcomes were reported descriptively or as a proportion with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Mean change, 95% CIs, and associated effect sizes were calculated for efficacy outcomes.

Results

Twenty-eight participants were included (15 men, 13 women; mean age 31.6 years [±9.1]) and 27 successfully completed the study. Participants were successfully recruited within three months and 278/280 sessions were successfully completed (adherence=99.3%, 95% CI 97.4%, 99.9%). Minimal adverse events were reported; one incident of localised bruising (0.36%, 95% CI 0.06%, 2.0%) and three incidences of excessive pain during or post-exercise from two separate participants (1.07%, 95% CI 0.03%, 3.1%). 82/2240 pulse oximeter readings were not recorded (3.7%, 95% CI 2.9%, 4.5%). Mean push-ups to volitional failure increased by 40% (mean change=8.0, 95% CI 6, 10, d=1.40). Mean arm girth and number of prescribed repetitions completed were unchanged.

Conclusions

Garment-integrated BFR is feasible and has no signal of important harm in the upper limb of healthy adults, and could proceed to a future trial with stop/go criteria for randomisation. Further work is required to investigate the efficacy of garment-integrated BFR and determine its equivalence or superiority compared to existing BFR methods.

Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Functional, Physiological and Structural Variables of Muscle in Patients with Chronic Pathologies: A Systematic Review

The main objective of this systematic review of the current literature is to analyze the changes that blood flow restriction (BFR) causes in subjects with neuro-musculoskeletal and/or systemic pathologies focusing on the following variables: strength, physiological changes, structural changes and cardiocirculatory variables. The search was carried out in seven databases, including randomized clinical trials in which therapeutic exercise was combined with the blood flow restriction tool in populations with musculoskeletal pathologies. Outcome variables are strength, structural changes, physiological changes and cardiocirculatory variables. Twenty studies were included in the present study. Although there is a lot of heterogeneity between the interventions and evaluation instruments, we observed how the restriction of blood flow presents significant differences in the vast majority of the variables analyzed. In addition, we observed how BFR can become a supplement that provides benefits when performed with low intensity, similar to those obtained through high-intensity muscular efforts. The application of the BFR technique can provide benefits in the short and medium term to increase strength, muscle thickness and cardiovascular endurance, even improving the physiological level of the cardiovascular system. In addition, BFR combined with low-load exercises also achieves benefits comparable to high-intensity exercises without the application of BFR, benefiting patients who are unable to lift high loads.

Effect of Resistance Training With Total and Partial Blood Flow Restriction on Biomarkers of Oxidative Stress and Apoptosis in Untrained Men

Introduction: The characterization of immune and oxidative stress responses to acute and chronic exercise training is important because it may aid in the safety and dose–response prescription of resistance training (RT) in many populations.

Purpose: The present study compared changes in acute oxidative stress and markers of apoptosis in immune cells before and after 8 weeks of low-load RT with total or partial blood flow restriction (BFR) versus high-load traditional RT.

Methods: Twenty-seven untrained men were randomly divided into three groups: traditional RT [75% one-repetition maximum (1-RM)], RT with partial (20% 1-RM), and total BFR (20% 1-RM). Over an 8-week period, participants performed six sets of arm curls until failure with 90 seconds of recovery for 3 days/week. Blood samples were obtained before and after the first and last training sessions.

Results: Data indicated that all training groups showed similar increases in muscular strength (p < 0.001), reduction in mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP) after exercise in neutrophils (p < 0.001), and increase in caspase-3 activity after exercise (p < 0.001). Traditional RT and total BFR showed increased plasma lipid peroxidation (p < 0.001) and protein carbonyls (p < 0.001) and lower levels of reduced glutathione (GSH) (p < 0.001) after exercise. No change was observed in oxidative stress biomarkers in response to partial BFR (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: Data show that RT with partial BFR can increase muscular strength but still does not augment biomarkers of oxidative stress in untrained men. In addition, RT with total BFR promoted similar responses of oxidative stress and markers of immune cell apoptosis versus traditional RT.

The Effect of Body Position and the Reliability of Upper Limb Arterial Occlusion Pressure Using a Handheld Doppler Ultrasound for Blood Flow Restriction Training

BACKGROUND

The precise calculation of arterial occlusive pressure is essential to accurately prescribe individualized pressures during blood flow restriction training. Arterial occlusion pressure in the lower limb varies significantly between different body positions while similar reports for the upper limb are lacking.

HYPOTHESIS

Body position has a significant effect in upper limb arterial occlusive pressure. Using cuffs with manual pump and a handheld Doppler ultrasound can be a reliable method to determine upper limb arterial blood flow restriction.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized repeated measures design.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

METHODS

Forty-two healthy participants (age mean ± SD = 28.1 ± 7.7 years) completed measurements in supine, seated, and standing position by 3 blinded raters. A cuff with a manual pump and a handheld acoustic ultrasound were used. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction was used to analyze differences between body positions. A within-subject coefficient of variation and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) test were used to calculate reproducibility and reliability, respectively.

RESULTS

A significantly higher upper limb arterial occlusive pressure was found in seated compared with supine position (P < 0.031) and in supine compared with standing position (P < 0.031) in all raters. An ICC of 0.894 (95% CI = 0.824-0.939, P < 0.001) was found in supine, 0.973 (95% CI = 0.955-0.985, P < 0.001) in seated, and 0.984 (95% CI = 0.973-0.991, P < 0.001) in standing position. ICC for test-retest reliability was found 0.90 (95% CI = 0.814-0.946, P < 0.001), 0.873 (95% CI = 0.762-0.93, P < 0.001), and 0.858 (95% CI = 0.737-0.923, P < 0.001) in the supine, seated, and standing position, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Upper limb arterial occlusive pressure was significantly dependent on body position. The method showed excellent interrater reliability and repeatability between different days.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Prescription of individualized pressures during blood flow restriction training requires measurement of upper limb arterial occlusive pressure in the appropriate position. The use of occlusion cuffs with a manual pump and a handheld Doppler ultrasound showed excellent reliability; however, the increased measurement error compared with the differences in arterial occlusive pressure between certain positions should be carefully considered for the clinical application of the method.

STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATIONS TAXONOMY (SORT)

B.

Perceived Barriers to Blood Flow Restriction Training

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training is increasing in popularity in the fitness and rehabilitation settings due to its role in optimizing muscle mass and strength as well as cardiovascular capacity, function, and a host of other benefits. However, despite the interest in this area of research, there are likely some perceived barriers that practitioners must overcome to effectively implement this modality into practice. These barriers include determining BFR training pressures, access to appropriate BFR training technologies for relevant demographics based on the current evidence, a comprehensive and systematic approach to medical screening for safe practice and strategies to mitigate excessive perceptual demands of BFR training to foster long-term compliance. This manuscript attempts to discuss each of these barriers and provides evidence-based strategies and direction to guide clinical practice and future research.

Blood Flow Restriction Training: To Adjust or Not Adjust the Cuff Pressure Over an Intervention Period?

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training combines exercise and partial reduction of muscular blood flow using a pressured cuff. BFR training has been used to increase strength and muscle mass in healthy and clinical populations. A major methodological concern of BFR training is blood flow restriction pressure (BFRP) delivered during an exercise bout. Although some studies increase BFRP throughout a training intervention, it is unclear whether BFRP adjustments are pivotal to maintain an adequate BFR during a training period. While neuromuscular adaptations induced by BFR are widely studied, cardiovascular changes throughout training intervention with BFR and their possible relationship with BFRP are less understood. This study aimed to discuss the need for BFRP adjustment based on cardiovascular outcomes and provide directions for future researches. We conducted a literature review and analyzed 29 studies investigating cardiovascular adaptations following BFR training. Participants in the studies were healthy, middle-aged adults, older adults and clinical patients. Cuff pressure, when adjusted, was increased during the training period. However, cardiovascular outcomes did not provide a plausible rationale for cuff pressure increase. In contrast, avoiding increments in cuff pressure may minimize discomfort, pain and risks associated with BFR interventions, particularly in clinical populations. Given that cardiovascular adaptations induced by BFR training are conflicting, it is challenging to indicate whether increases or decreases in BFRP are needed. Based on the available evidence, we suggest that future studies investigate if maintaining or decreasing cuff pressure makes BFR training safer and/or more comfortable with similar physiological adaptation.

Current Clinical Concepts: Blood Flow Restriction Training

Muscle weakness and atrophy are common impairments following musculoskeletal injury. The use of blood flow restriction (BFR) training offers the ability to mitigate weakness and atrophy without overloading healing tissues. This approach requires consideration of a wide range of parameters and the purpose of this manuscript is to provide insights into proposed mechanisms of effectiveness, safety considerations, application guidelines, and clinical guidelines for BFR training following musculoskeletal injury. BFR training appears to be a safe and effective approach to therapeutic exercise in sports medicine environments. While training with higher loads produces the most substantial increases in strength and hypertrophy, BFR training appears to be a reasonable option to bridge between earlier phases of rehabilitation when higher loads may not be tolerated by the patient and later stages that are consistent with return to sport performance.

Limb occlusion pressure for blood flow restricted exercise: Variability and relations with participant characteristics

OBJECTIVE

Assess lower-extremity blood flow restricted exercise (BFR) limb occlusion pressure (LOP) variability and identify related intrinsic characteristics using a portable Delphi BFR system.

DESIGN

Repeated measures.

SETTING

Laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-two healthy males (n = 25) and females (n = 17) (25.8 ± 5.2 y, 1.76 ±0 .09 m, 78.9 ± 14.9 kg) completed two visits. Brachial artery blood pressure, thigh circumferences (TC), and LOP were measured supine.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Linear mixed-effects models (LMM) and generalizability theory were used to evaluate LOP between legs and days, determine intrinsic characteristic relations, and assess random variance components.

RESULTS

LOP was not different between legs (p = .730) or days (p = .916; grand mean = 183.7 mmHg [178.4, 189.1]). LOP varied significantly between participants (p = .011, standard error = 47.3 mmHg). 47% of LOP variance was between participants, 18% and 6% was within participants between days and legs, respectively, and 28% was associated with random error. The relative error variance was 14.4 mmHg. Pulse pressure (PP) (p = .005) and TC (p = .040) were positively associated with LOP. A LMM including PP and TC predicted LOP with a mean absolute difference of 11.1 mmHg [9.7, 12.6] compared to measured LOP.

CONCLUSIONS

The relative error variance suggests that clinicians should measure LOP consistently for each patient to ensure BFR safety and effectiveness.