Literature DB >> 28088558

The effects of upper body exercise across different levels of blood flow restriction on arterial occlusion pressure and perceptual responses.

Kevin T Mattocks1, Matthew B Jessee1, Brittany R Counts1, Samuel L Buckner1, J Grant Mouser1, Scott J Dankel1, Gilberto C Laurentino1, Jeremy P Loenneke2.   

Abstract

Recent studies have investigated relative pressures that are applied during blood flow restriction exercise ranging from 40%-90% of resting arterial occlusion pressure; however, no studies have investigated relative pressures below 40% arterial occlusion pressure. The purpose of this study was to characterize the cardiovascular and perceptual responses to different levels of pressures. Twenty-six resistance trained participants performed four sets of unilateral elbow flexion exercise using 30% of their 1RM in combination with blood flow restriction inflated to one of six relative applied pressures (0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 90% arterial occlusion pressure). Arterial occlusion pressure was measured before (pre) and immediately after the last set of exercise at the radial artery. RPE and discomfort were taken prior to (pre) and following each set of exercise. Data presented as mean (95% CI) except for perceptual responses represented as the median (25th, 75th percentile). Arterial occlusion pressure increased from pre to post (p<0.001) in all conditions but was augmented further with higher pressures [e.g. 0%: 36 (30-42) mmHg vs. 10%: 39 (34-44) mmHg vs. 90% 46 (41-52) mmHg]. For RPE and discomfort, there were significant differences across conditions for all sets of exercise (p<0.01) with the ratings of RPE [e.g. 0%: 14.5 (13, 17) vs. 10%: 13.5 (12, 17) vs. 90%: 17 (14.75, 19) during last set] and discomfort [e.g. 0%: 3.5 (1.5, 6.25) vs. 10%: 3 (1, 6) vs. 90%: 7 (4.5, 9) during last set] generally being greater at the higher restriction pressures. All of these differences at the higher restriction pressures occurred despite completing a lower total volume of exercise. Applying higher relative pressures results in the greatest cardiovascular response, higher perceptual ratings, and greater decrease in exercise volume compared to lower restriction pressures. Therefore, the perceptual responses from lower relative pressures may be more appealing and provide a safer and more tolerable stimulus for individuals.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28088558     DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.01.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Behav        ISSN: 0031-9384


  12 in total

1.  Limb Occlusion Pressure: A Method to Assess Changes in Systolic Blood Pressure.

Authors:  Zachary W Bell; Matthew B Jessee; Kevin T Mattocks; Samuel L Buckner; Scott J Dankel; J Grant Mouser; Takashi Abe; Jeremy P Loenneke
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2020-02-01

2.  Effects of load on the acute response of muscles proximal and distal to blood flow restriction.

Authors:  Matthew B Jessee; J Grant Mouser; Samuel L Buckner; Scott J Dankel; Kevin T Mattocks; Takashi Abe; Jeremy P Loenneke
Journal:  J Physiol Sci       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 2.781

3.  Blood Flow Restriction Training.

Authors:  Daniel S Lorenz; Lane Bailey; Kevin E Wilk; Robert E Mangine; Paul Head; Terry L Grindstaff; Scot Morrison
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.824

4.  Moderately heavy exercise produces lower cardiovascular, RPE, and discomfort compared to lower load exercise with and without blood flow restriction.

Authors:  Zachary W Bell; Samuel L Buckner; Matthew B Jessee; J Grant Mouser; Kevin T Mattocks; Scott J Dankel; Takashi Abe; Jeremy P Loenneke
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 3.078

5.  Influence and reliability of lower-limb arterial occlusion pressure at different body positions.

Authors:  Luke Hughes; Owen Jeffries; Mark Waldron; Ben Rosenblatt; Conor Gissane; Bruce Paton; Stephen D Patterson
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 6.  Blood Flow Restriction Exercise: Considerations of Methodology, Application, and Safety.

Authors:  Stephen D Patterson; Luke Hughes; Stuart Warmington; Jamie Burr; Brendan R Scott; Johnny Owens; Takashi Abe; Jakob L Nielsen; Cleiton Augusto Libardi; Gilberto Laurentino; Gabriel Rodrigues Neto; Christopher Brandner; Juan Martin-Hernandez; Jeremy Loenneke
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 4.566

7.  Blood flow restriction with different load levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Roger Andrey Carvalho Jardim; Tamara Silva de Sousa; Wueyla Nicoly Nascimento Dos Santos; Areolino Pena Matos; Natália Camargo Rodrigues Iosimuta
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Physiological Responses to Acute Cycling With Blood Flow Restriction.

Authors:  Matthew A Kilgas; Tejin Yoon; John McDaniel; Kevin C Phillips; Steven J Elmer
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 4.566

Review 9.  Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training in Tendon Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review on Intervention Parameters, Physiological Effects, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Ian Burton; Aisling McCormack
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-04-25

Review 10.  Effects of blood flow restriction without additional exercise on strength reductions and muscular atrophy following immobilization: A systematic review.

Authors:  Mikhail Santos Cerqueira; José Diego Sales Do Nascimento; Daniel Germano Maciel; Jean Artur Mendonça Barboza; Wouber Hérickson De Brito Vieira
Journal:  J Sport Health Sci       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 7.179

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.