Impact of limb occlusion pressure assessment position on performance, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses in blood flow restricted low-load resistance exercise: A randomized crossover trial.
Okan Kamiş, Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Neslihan Akçay, Kadir Keskin, Kerem Can Yıldız, Cem Sofuoğlu, Tim Werner, Luke Hughes
{"title":"Impact of limb occlusion pressure assessment position on performance, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses in blood flow restricted low-load resistance exercise: A randomized crossover trial.","authors":"Okan Kamiş, Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Neslihan Akçay, Kadir Keskin, Kerem Can Yıldız, Cem Sofuoğlu, Tim Werner, Luke Hughes","doi":"10.1080/02640414.2024.2422205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the effect of limb occlusion pressure (LOP) position on exercise performance, cardiovascular responses, and perceptual experiences during seated bilateral leg extensions with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty resistance-trained males (age: 22 ± 2 years; weight: 74.4 ± 13.6 kg; height: 177.4 ± 6.4 cm; BMI: 23.5 ± 3.3 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) participated. Each performed exercise to failure (4 sets, 30% 1RM, 1 min rest) in three conditions: Supine LOP-BFR, Seated LOP-BFR, and no-BFR. BFR was applied at 60% LOP. Significant interaction effects were found for RPE (<i>p</i> = 0.021, d = 0.76), RPD (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.72), and DOMS (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 2.28). Statistically significant fewer repetitions were completed in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.5), Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.0), and Seated LOP-BFR vs. Supine LOP-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.6). RPE was higher in Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.52). RPD was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.62) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.25). DOMS was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.77) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 3.52). Seated LOP-BFR increased perceptual demands and reduced repetitions compared to Supine LOP-BFR. Both LOP-BFR conditions reduced repetitions compared to no-BFR without affecting cardiovascular measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":17066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2024.2422205","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of limb occlusion pressure (LOP) position on exercise performance, cardiovascular responses, and perceptual experiences during seated bilateral leg extensions with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty resistance-trained males (age: 22 ± 2 years; weight: 74.4 ± 13.6 kg; height: 177.4 ± 6.4 cm; BMI: 23.5 ± 3.3 kg/m2) participated. Each performed exercise to failure (4 sets, 30% 1RM, 1 min rest) in three conditions: Supine LOP-BFR, Seated LOP-BFR, and no-BFR. BFR was applied at 60% LOP. Significant interaction effects were found for RPE (p = 0.021, d = 0.76), RPD (p < 0.01, d = 1.72), and DOMS (p < 0.01, d = 2.28). Statistically significant fewer repetitions were completed in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.5), Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 1.0), and Seated LOP-BFR vs. Supine LOP-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.6). RPE was higher in Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.52). RPD was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.62) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 1.25). DOMS was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.77) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 3.52). Seated LOP-BFR increased perceptual demands and reduced repetitions compared to Supine LOP-BFR. Both LOP-BFR conditions reduced repetitions compared to no-BFR without affecting cardiovascular measures.
本研究调查了肢体闭塞压力(LOP)位置对有和无血流限制(BFR)的坐姿双腿伸展运动中的运动表现、心血管反应和感知体验的影响。30 名接受过阻力训练的男性(年龄:22 ± 2 岁;体重:74.4 ± 13.6 千克;身高:177.4 ± 6.4 厘米;体重指数:23.5 ± 3.3 千克/平方米)参加了此次活动。每人在三种条件下进行运动至失败(4 组,30% 1RM,休息 1 分钟):仰卧 LOP-BFR、坐姿 LOP-BFR 和无 BFR。在 60% LOP 时进行 BFR。结果发现,RPE(p = 0.021,d = 0.76)、RPD(p p p p p p p p p p p
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Sports Sciences has an international reputation for publishing articles of a high standard and is both Medline and Clarivate Analytics-listed. It publishes research on various aspects of the sports and exercise sciences, including anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, performance analysis, physiology, psychology, sports medicine and health, as well as coaching and talent identification, kinanthropometry and other interdisciplinary perspectives.
The emphasis of the Journal is on the human sciences, broadly defined and applied to sport and exercise. Besides experimental work in human responses to exercise, the subjects covered will include human responses to technologies such as the design of sports equipment and playing facilities, research in training, selection, performance prediction or modification, and stress reduction or manifestation. Manuscripts considered for publication include those dealing with original investigations of exercise, validation of technological innovations in sport or comprehensive reviews of topics relevant to the scientific study of sport.