Felipe Domingos Lisbôa, Rafael Alves de Aguiar, Gustavo Soares Pereira, Fabrizio Caputo
{"title":"Acute Effects of a Practical Blood Flow Restriction Device During Swimming Exercise.","authors":"Felipe Domingos Lisbôa, Rafael Alves de Aguiar, Gustavo Soares Pereira, Fabrizio Caputo","doi":"10.1080/02701367.2023.2263050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> The present study aimed to analyze: 1) the reliability of the tissue saturation index (TSI) and ratings of perceived discomfort (RPD) responses wearing a neoprene practical cuff (PrC), comparing with the responses from traditional (TrC) pneumatic cuffs (study I); 2) the effects of PrC on metabolic (blood lactate concentration, BLC), perceptual (rate of perceived effort, RPE) and kinematic responses at sub-maximal swimming velocities (study II). <b>Methods:</b> Study I; 1) PrC test-retest at rest and during swimming ergometer exercise; 2) BFR at rest with TrC inflated to different percentages of the minimum arterial occlusion pressure (MAOP; 60, 80, 100, 120 and 140%). Test-retest reliability of TSI and RPD was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and comparisons among conditions were analyzed by one-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Study II; 1) 50, 200 and 400 m swimming performances; 2) sub-maximal incremental swimming protocol with and without PrC. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare all variables during sub-maximal velocities. <b>Results:</b> TSI (ICC = 0.81; 95%CI 0.62-0.91) and RPD (ICC = 0.97; 95%CI 0.94-0.99) were reliable under restricted exercise using PrC. TSI during restricted exercise was lower (<i>p <</i>.001) compared to unrestricted exercise (6.8 ± 6.1% vs. 21.6 ± 8.2% of physiological normalization). PrC showed higher BLC only at or above 91% of critical velocity (<i>p</i> < .03), while stroke rate and RPE were higher (<i>p</i> < .005), and stroke length was lower (<i>p</i> < .03) during all swimming velocities. <b>Conclusion:</b> This easy-to-handle and affordable practical BFR device increased physiological stress at sub-maximal efforts which could be an additional training tool for swimmers.</p>","PeriodicalId":94191,"journal":{"name":"Research quarterly for exercise and sport","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research quarterly for exercise and sport","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2023.2263050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The present study aimed to analyze: 1) the reliability of the tissue saturation index (TSI) and ratings of perceived discomfort (RPD) responses wearing a neoprene practical cuff (PrC), comparing with the responses from traditional (TrC) pneumatic cuffs (study I); 2) the effects of PrC on metabolic (blood lactate concentration, BLC), perceptual (rate of perceived effort, RPE) and kinematic responses at sub-maximal swimming velocities (study II). Methods: Study I; 1) PrC test-retest at rest and during swimming ergometer exercise; 2) BFR at rest with TrC inflated to different percentages of the minimum arterial occlusion pressure (MAOP; 60, 80, 100, 120 and 140%). Test-retest reliability of TSI and RPD was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and comparisons among conditions were analyzed by one-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Study II; 1) 50, 200 and 400 m swimming performances; 2) sub-maximal incremental swimming protocol with and without PrC. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare all variables during sub-maximal velocities. Results: TSI (ICC = 0.81; 95%CI 0.62-0.91) and RPD (ICC = 0.97; 95%CI 0.94-0.99) were reliable under restricted exercise using PrC. TSI during restricted exercise was lower (p <.001) compared to unrestricted exercise (6.8 ± 6.1% vs. 21.6 ± 8.2% of physiological normalization). PrC showed higher BLC only at or above 91% of critical velocity (p < .03), while stroke rate and RPE were higher (p < .005), and stroke length was lower (p < .03) during all swimming velocities. Conclusion: This easy-to-handle and affordable practical BFR device increased physiological stress at sub-maximal efforts which could be an additional training tool for swimmers.