Similar acute increases in muscle size, but discrete perceptual responses to low-load blood flow restriction protocols

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Mason A. Howard, Paola M. Rivera, Sean M. Lubiak, Christopher E. Proppe, Jeffrey T. Schmidt, Thalia L. Fraifer, Ezra D. Shobe, Ethan C. Hill
{"title":"Similar acute increases in muscle size, but discrete perceptual responses to low-load blood flow restriction protocols","authors":"Mason A. Howard,&nbsp;Paola M. Rivera,&nbsp;Sean M. Lubiak,&nbsp;Christopher E. Proppe,&nbsp;Jeffrey T. Schmidt,&nbsp;Thalia L. Fraifer,&nbsp;Ezra D. Shobe,&nbsp;Ethan C. Hill","doi":"10.1111/cpf.70097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of this investigation was to assess muscle size and perceptual responses following acute bouts of low-load blood flow restriction resistance exercise performed with a 75-repetition (1 × 30, 3 × 15), 3 sets to failure, and a 1 set to failure protocols. Nineteen females randomly performed a 75-repetition, 3 sets to failure, and 1 one set to failure low-load blood flow restriction protocols consisting of unilateral, submaximal (30% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction), isokinetic (90°·s<sup>−1</sup>), leg extension muscle actions. The minimal difference (MD) was used to determine real changes in each dependent variable from pretest to posttest. There were no significant (<i>p</i> = 0.191–0.567) interactions, main effects of Condition (<i>p</i> = 0.108–0.931), or main effects of Muscle (<i>p</i> = 0.103–0.958) for muscle thickness (MTH), cross-sectional area (CSA), or echo intensity (EI) of the rectus femoris or vastus lateralis. Across the protocols, the changes in MTH, CSA, and EI exceeded the minimal difference for 16–19, 18–19, and 11–19 of the 19 participants, respectively. Following the final set of each protocol, 3 sets to failure (8.94 ± 1.07 au) resulted in a greater rating of perceived exertion compared to the 1 set to failure (8.02 ± 1.08 au) and 75-repetition (8.05 ± 1.35 au) protocols. All three protocols resulted in comparable acute changes in muscle size; however, the 3 sets to failure resulted in the greatest perceptual response. Therefore, comparable acute muscle size responses can be achieved with the 75-repetition protocol or one set performed to failure with a reduced level of exertion.</p>","PeriodicalId":10504,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","volume":"46 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cpf.70097","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to assess muscle size and perceptual responses following acute bouts of low-load blood flow restriction resistance exercise performed with a 75-repetition (1 × 30, 3 × 15), 3 sets to failure, and a 1 set to failure protocols. Nineteen females randomly performed a 75-repetition, 3 sets to failure, and 1 one set to failure low-load blood flow restriction protocols consisting of unilateral, submaximal (30% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction), isokinetic (90°·s−1), leg extension muscle actions. The minimal difference (MD) was used to determine real changes in each dependent variable from pretest to posttest. There were no significant (p = 0.191–0.567) interactions, main effects of Condition (p = 0.108–0.931), or main effects of Muscle (p = 0.103–0.958) for muscle thickness (MTH), cross-sectional area (CSA), or echo intensity (EI) of the rectus femoris or vastus lateralis. Across the protocols, the changes in MTH, CSA, and EI exceeded the minimal difference for 16–19, 18–19, and 11–19 of the 19 participants, respectively. Following the final set of each protocol, 3 sets to failure (8.94 ± 1.07 au) resulted in a greater rating of perceived exertion compared to the 1 set to failure (8.02 ± 1.08 au) and 75-repetition (8.05 ± 1.35 au) protocols. All three protocols resulted in comparable acute changes in muscle size; however, the 3 sets to failure resulted in the greatest perceptual response. Therefore, comparable acute muscle size responses can be achieved with the 75-repetition protocol or one set performed to failure with a reduced level of exertion.

类似的急性肌肉大小增加,但对低负荷血流限制方案的知觉反应离散。
本研究的目的是评估急性低负荷血流限制阻力运动后的肌肉大小和知觉反应,该运动采用75次重复(1 × 30,3 × 15), 3组失败和1组失败方案。19名女性随机进行75次重复,3组至失败,1组至失败的低负荷血流限制方案,包括单侧,次最大(最大自主等速收缩的30%),等速(90°·s-1),腿部伸展肌肉动作。最小差异(MD)用于确定每个因变量从前测到后测的真实变化。对于股直肌或股外侧肌的肌肉厚度(MTH)、横截面面积(CSA)或回波强度(EI),条件的主要影响(p = 0.108-0.931)和肌肉的主要影响(p = 0.103-0.958)无显著相互作用(p = 0.191-0.567)。在所有方案中,19名参与者中MTH、CSA和EI的变化分别超过了16-19、18-19和11-19的最小差异。在每个方案的最后一组之后,与1组失败(8.02±1.08 au)和75组重复(8.05±1.35 au)方案相比,3组失败(8.94±1.07 au)导致的感知劳累评级更高。所有三种方案都导致了肌肉大小的类似急性变化;然而,3组失败导致最大的知觉反应。因此,类似的急性肌肉大小反应可以通过75次重复的方案来实现,或者一组在减少运动水平的情况下进行失败。
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
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging publishes reports on clinical and experimental research pertinent to human physiology in health and disease. The scope of the Journal is very broad, covering all aspects of the regulatory system in the cardiovascular, renal and pulmonary systems with special emphasis on methodological aspects. The focus for the journal is, however, work that has potential clinical relevance. The Journal also features review articles on recent front-line research within these fields of interest. Covered by the major abstracting services including Current Contents and Science Citation Index, Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging plays an important role in providing effective and productive communication among clinical physiologists world-wide.
×
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
小红书