Blood flow restriction training in South Africa - a panel discussion.

Q3 Health Professions
R W Evans, J Ganda, L van Schalkwyk, D L Fabricius, M Cornelissen
{"title":"Blood flow restriction training in South Africa - a panel discussion.","authors":"R W Evans,&nbsp;J Ganda,&nbsp;L van Schalkwyk,&nbsp;D L Fabricius,&nbsp;M Cornelissen","doi":"10.17159/2078-516X/2022/v34i1a14796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Blood flow restriction (BFR) training uses a cuff to partially occlude venous blood flow and improve musculoskeletal training outcomes. Over the past 25 years, numerous studies have demonstrated its relative safety and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Blood flow restriction training is under review by the Health Professions Council of South Africa due to safety and ethical concerns. The objective of this roundtable discussion is to gain better insight into the current use and perception of blood flow restriction training in South Africa.</p><p><strong>Formation of panel: </strong>The expert panel had experience with the use of BFR training and included one representative from each of the following professions, namely, sports medicine, physiotherapy and biokinetics.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The panellists provided their unique perspectives on BFR training, whilst reaching a relative consensus on its safety, screening, efficacy, and appropriate use. Agreement on appropriate loading and occlusion pressure protocols during different phases of rehabilitation was less clear.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although BFR is a safe and effective modality, the development of evidence-based protocols among different health professionals in South Africa is required to ensure good clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":31065,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"34 1","pages":"v34i1a14796"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9924536/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2078-516X/2022/v34i1a14796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Blood flow restriction (BFR) training uses a cuff to partially occlude venous blood flow and improve musculoskeletal training outcomes. Over the past 25 years, numerous studies have demonstrated its relative safety and efficacy.

Objectives: Blood flow restriction training is under review by the Health Professions Council of South Africa due to safety and ethical concerns. The objective of this roundtable discussion is to gain better insight into the current use and perception of blood flow restriction training in South Africa.

Formation of panel: The expert panel had experience with the use of BFR training and included one representative from each of the following professions, namely, sports medicine, physiotherapy and biokinetics.

Discussion: The panellists provided their unique perspectives on BFR training, whilst reaching a relative consensus on its safety, screening, efficacy, and appropriate use. Agreement on appropriate loading and occlusion pressure protocols during different phases of rehabilitation was less clear.

Conclusion: Although BFR is a safe and effective modality, the development of evidence-based protocols among different health professionals in South Africa is required to ensure good clinical practice.

Abstract Image

南非的血流限制训练——小组讨论。
背景:血流量限制(BFR)训练使用袖带部分阻断静脉血流量,改善肌肉骨骼训练结果。在过去的25年里,大量的研究已经证明了它的相对安全性和有效性。目标:出于安全和伦理方面的考虑,南非卫生专业委员会正在审查限制血流培训。这次圆桌讨论的目的是更好地了解南非目前对血流限制培训的使用和看法。小组的组成:专家小组具有使用BFR培训的经验,并包括来自下列各专业的一名代表,即运动医学、物理治疗和生物动力学。讨论:小组成员提供了他们对BFR培训的独特观点,同时就其安全性,筛查,有效性和适当使用达成了相对共识。在不同的康复阶段,对适当的负荷和咬合压力方案的一致意见尚不清楚。结论:虽然BFR是一种安全有效的方式,但需要在南非不同的卫生专业人员之间制定循证方案,以确保良好的临床实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信