Impacts of Varying Blood Flow Restriction Cuff Size and Material on Arterial, Venous and Calf Muscle Pump-Mediated Blood Flow

Steven B. Machek, Dillon R. Harris, J. Heileson, Dylan T. Wilburn, Jeffrey S. Forsse, D. Willoughby
{"title":"Impacts of Varying Blood Flow Restriction Cuff Size and Material on Arterial, Venous and Calf Muscle Pump-Mediated Blood Flow","authors":"Steven B. Machek, Dillon R. Harris, J. Heileson, Dylan T. Wilburn, Jeffrey S. Forsse, D. Willoughby","doi":"10.3390/oxygen3020014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Blood flow restriction (BFR) may become ineffective or potentially dangerous without sufficient standardization. The purpose of this investigation was therefore to (1) assess the viability of multiple sizes of a novel BFR cuff to determine arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and (2) compare resting arterial, venous and calf muscle pump (cMP)-mediated blood flow between the aforementioned conditions and a commonly employed wide-rigid, tourniquet-style cuff. In randomized, counter-balanced, and crossover fashion, 20 apparently healthy males (18–40 years) donned a widely employed wide-rigid (WR) cuff, along with the largest (NE) and manufacturer-recommended sizes (NER) of a novel narrow-elastic cuff. Participants subsequently assessed AOP, as well as (at 80%AOP) arterial, venous, and venous cMP flow relative to baseline values via ultrasound. All analyses were performed at a significance level of p < 0.05. Analyses revealed a significant condition effect for AOP (p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.907) whereby WR was significantly lower than both NE and NER; in addition, the latter two did not differ. Compared with baseline, there were no statistically significant differences between cuffs for either arterial or cMP-mediated blood flow. Unsurprisingly, no participants demonstrated venous blood flow at 80% AOP. These findings support the viability of a novel narrow-elastic BFR product, evidenced by consistent AOP acquisition and equivocal blood flow parameters.","PeriodicalId":74387,"journal":{"name":"Oxygen (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxygen (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/oxygen3020014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Blood flow restriction (BFR) may become ineffective or potentially dangerous without sufficient standardization. The purpose of this investigation was therefore to (1) assess the viability of multiple sizes of a novel BFR cuff to determine arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and (2) compare resting arterial, venous and calf muscle pump (cMP)-mediated blood flow between the aforementioned conditions and a commonly employed wide-rigid, tourniquet-style cuff. In randomized, counter-balanced, and crossover fashion, 20 apparently healthy males (18–40 years) donned a widely employed wide-rigid (WR) cuff, along with the largest (NE) and manufacturer-recommended sizes (NER) of a novel narrow-elastic cuff. Participants subsequently assessed AOP, as well as (at 80%AOP) arterial, venous, and venous cMP flow relative to baseline values via ultrasound. All analyses were performed at a significance level of p < 0.05. Analyses revealed a significant condition effect for AOP (p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.907) whereby WR was significantly lower than both NE and NER; in addition, the latter two did not differ. Compared with baseline, there were no statistically significant differences between cuffs for either arterial or cMP-mediated blood flow. Unsurprisingly, no participants demonstrated venous blood flow at 80% AOP. These findings support the viability of a novel narrow-elastic BFR product, evidenced by consistent AOP acquisition and equivocal blood flow parameters.
不同血流限制袖带尺寸和材料对动脉、静脉和小腿肌肉泵介导的血流的影响
如果没有足够的标准化,血流量限制(BFR)可能会变得无效或潜在危险。因此,本研究的目的是:(1)评估多种尺寸的新型BFR袖带的可行性,以确定动脉闭塞压(AOP);(2)比较静息动脉、静脉和小腿肌肉泵(cMP)介导的血流在上述条件下与常用的宽刚性止血带式袖带之间的差异。在随机、平衡和交叉时尚中,20名明显健康的男性(18-40岁)戴上了广泛使用的宽刚性(WR)袖带,以及最大(NE)和制造商推荐尺寸(NER)的新型窄弹性袖带。参与者随后通过超声评估AOP,以及相对于基线值的动脉、静脉和静脉cMP流量(在80%AOP时)。所有分析均以p < 0.05的显著性水平进行。分析显示AOP的条件效应显著(p < 0.001;ηp2 = 0.907),其中WR显著低于NE和NER;此外,后两者并无不同。与基线相比,袖口之间动脉或cmp介导的血流没有统计学上的显著差异。不出所料,没有参与者表现出静脉血流达到80% AOP。这些发现支持了一种新型窄弹性BFR产品的可行性,证明了一致的AOP获取和模棱两可的血流参数。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信