Effect of blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.
{"title":"Effect of blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Junzhen Huang, Hun-Young Park","doi":"10.20463/pan.2024.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the effects of blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training (BFR + LIRT) on pain, adverse events, muscle strength, and function in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study adhered to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020) and applied the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) standards to ensure the high quality of the systematic review. A comprehensive literature search was conducted until August 2023 using four selected keywords (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, blood flow restriction training, and resistance training) across five search engines (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and PEDro).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies were analyzed. The results showed that BFR + LIRT had similar effects on pain, risk of adverse events, muscle strength, self-reported function, and physical function compared with resistance training (RT).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis further support the potential of BFR + LIRT in the disease management of patients with OA or RA. According to this analysis, BFR + LIRT had a lower risk of adverse events than high-intensity resistance training (HIRT) and may be a safer training modality. BFR + LIRT offers greater advantages in improving physical function than LIRT and was able to provide similar benefits to HIRT without increasing the training load. These findings suggest that BFR + LIRT is a safe and effective strategy for treating patients with OA or RA. However, owing to the limited number of studies covered in this analysis, additional higher-quality studies are needed to strengthen this conclusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":74444,"journal":{"name":"Physical activity and nutrition","volume":"28 1","pages":"7-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11079382/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical activity and nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20463/pan.2024.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This study evaluated the effects of blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training (BFR + LIRT) on pain, adverse events, muscle strength, and function in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods: This study adhered to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020) and applied the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) standards to ensure the high quality of the systematic review. A comprehensive literature search was conducted until August 2023 using four selected keywords (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, blood flow restriction training, and resistance training) across five search engines (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and PEDro).
Results: Ten studies were analyzed. The results showed that BFR + LIRT had similar effects on pain, risk of adverse events, muscle strength, self-reported function, and physical function compared with resistance training (RT).
Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis further support the potential of BFR + LIRT in the disease management of patients with OA or RA. According to this analysis, BFR + LIRT had a lower risk of adverse events than high-intensity resistance training (HIRT) and may be a safer training modality. BFR + LIRT offers greater advantages in improving physical function than LIRT and was able to provide similar benefits to HIRT without increasing the training load. These findings suggest that BFR + LIRT is a safe and effective strategy for treating patients with OA or RA. However, owing to the limited number of studies covered in this analysis, additional higher-quality studies are needed to strengthen this conclusion.