血流限制作为运动后恢复策略:文献现状系统回顾。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Biology of Sport Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI:10.5114/biolsport.2024.133664
José M Oliva-Lozano, Stephen D Patterson, George Chiampas, Ellie Maybury, Rick Cost
{"title":"血流限制作为运动后恢复策略:文献现状系统回顾。","authors":"José M Oliva-Lozano, Stephen D Patterson, George Chiampas, Ellie Maybury, Rick Cost","doi":"10.5114/biolsport.2024.133664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to systematically review the current literature on blood flow restriction (BFR) as a post-exercise recovery strategy. Experimental studies investigating the effect of BFR on recovery after exercise were included. Only studies meeting the following inclusion criteria were selected: (a) studies investigating about BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in athletes and healthy individuals; (b) the full text being available in English; (c) experimental research study design. Studies that exclusively analyzed BFR as a recovery strategy during the exercise (e.g., recovery strategy between bouts of exercise) were excluded. A literature review was conducted on the PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science electronic databases up until May 7<sup>th</sup>, 2023. The main findings were that (i) 9 studies investigated passive BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy, which shows a significant lack of research in both team and individual sports (especially in female populations), and only 2 studies used active BFR protocols; (ii) although a high quality range of studies was observed, there were methodological limitations such as BFR interventions that were usually conducted after fatiguing protocols or fitness tests, which may not represent the real exercise (e.g., a sprint session of 6 sets of 50 m may induce muscle damage but it does not represent the demands of a team sport like rugby or soccer); (iii) there is a lack of consistency in BFR protocols (e.g., number of cycles or duration of the occlusion-reperfusion periods) for recovery; (iv) some studies showed beneficial effects while others found no positive or detrimental effects of BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in comparison with the control/SHAM group. In conclusion, only 11 studies investigated BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy and there is not any significant amount of evidence in team or individual sports (especially in female populations). BFR could be a potential post-exercise recovery strategy, but practitioners should use caution when applying this method of recovery for their athletes and clients. In addition, it would be of interest for high performance-related practitioners to have a better understanding of the benefits of BFR interventions combined with either active or passive forms of exercise as a post-exercise recovery strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":55365,"journal":{"name":"Biology of Sport","volume":"41 3","pages":"191-200"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11167478/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blood flow restriction as a post-exercise recovery strategy: A systematic review of the current status of the literature.\",\"authors\":\"José M Oliva-Lozano, Stephen D Patterson, George Chiampas, Ellie Maybury, Rick Cost\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/biolsport.2024.133664\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this study was to systematically review the current literature on blood flow restriction (BFR) as a post-exercise recovery strategy. Experimental studies investigating the effect of BFR on recovery after exercise were included. Only studies meeting the following inclusion criteria were selected: (a) studies investigating about BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in athletes and healthy individuals; (b) the full text being available in English; (c) experimental research study design. Studies that exclusively analyzed BFR as a recovery strategy during the exercise (e.g., recovery strategy between bouts of exercise) were excluded. A literature review was conducted on the PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science electronic databases up until May 7<sup>th</sup>, 2023. The main findings were that (i) 9 studies investigated passive BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy, which shows a significant lack of research in both team and individual sports (especially in female populations), and only 2 studies used active BFR protocols; (ii) although a high quality range of studies was observed, there were methodological limitations such as BFR interventions that were usually conducted after fatiguing protocols or fitness tests, which may not represent the real exercise (e.g., a sprint session of 6 sets of 50 m may induce muscle damage but it does not represent the demands of a team sport like rugby or soccer); (iii) there is a lack of consistency in BFR protocols (e.g., number of cycles or duration of the occlusion-reperfusion periods) for recovery; (iv) some studies showed beneficial effects while others found no positive or detrimental effects of BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in comparison with the control/SHAM group. In conclusion, only 11 studies investigated BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy and there is not any significant amount of evidence in team or individual sports (especially in female populations). BFR could be a potential post-exercise recovery strategy, but practitioners should use caution when applying this method of recovery for their athletes and clients. In addition, it would be of interest for high performance-related practitioners to have a better understanding of the benefits of BFR interventions combined with either active or passive forms of exercise as a post-exercise recovery strategy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"volume\":\"41 3\",\"pages\":\"191-200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11167478/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.133664\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.133664","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是系统回顾目前有关将血流限制(BFR)作为运动后恢复策略的文献。研究纳入了调查血流限制对运动后恢复影响的实验研究。只有符合以下纳入标准的研究才被选中:(a)将血流限制作为运动员和健康人运动后恢复策略的研究;(b)全文为英文;(c)实验研究设计。排除了只分析 BFR 作为运动期间恢复策略的研究(例如,运动间歇期的恢复策略)。截至 2023 年 5 月 7 日,在 PubMed、Cochrane 和 Web of Science 电子数据库中进行了文献综述。主要发现有:(i) 9 项研究调查了被动式 BFR 作为运动后恢复策略,这表明在团队和个人运动(尤其是女性人群)方面的研究明显不足,只有 2 项研究使用了主动式 BFR 方案;(ii) 虽然观察到的研究质量较高,但存在方法学方面的限制,如 BFR 干预通常在疲劳方案或体能测试后进行,这可能并不代表真实的运动(例如,在短跑训练中做 6 组运动)、例如,6 组 50 米的短跑训练可能会导致肌肉损伤,但这并不代表橄榄球或足球等团队运动的要求);(iii) 用于恢复的 BFR 方案(如闭塞-再灌注周期的次数或持续时间)缺乏一致性;(iv) 一些研究显示 BFR 有益,而另一些研究则发现,与对照组/SHAM 组相比,BFR 作为运动后恢复策略没有积极或消极的影响。总之,只有 11 项研究调查了 BFR 作为运动后恢复策略的情况,而且在团队或个人运动(尤其是女性人群)中没有大量证据。BFR可能是一种潜在的运动后恢复策略,但从业人员在为运动员和客户应用这种恢复方法时应谨慎。此外,与运动成绩相关的从业人员有兴趣更好地了解 BFR 干预结合主动或被动运动形式作为运动后恢复策略的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Blood flow restriction as a post-exercise recovery strategy: A systematic review of the current status of the literature.

The aim of this study was to systematically review the current literature on blood flow restriction (BFR) as a post-exercise recovery strategy. Experimental studies investigating the effect of BFR on recovery after exercise were included. Only studies meeting the following inclusion criteria were selected: (a) studies investigating about BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in athletes and healthy individuals; (b) the full text being available in English; (c) experimental research study design. Studies that exclusively analyzed BFR as a recovery strategy during the exercise (e.g., recovery strategy between bouts of exercise) were excluded. A literature review was conducted on the PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science electronic databases up until May 7th, 2023. The main findings were that (i) 9 studies investigated passive BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy, which shows a significant lack of research in both team and individual sports (especially in female populations), and only 2 studies used active BFR protocols; (ii) although a high quality range of studies was observed, there were methodological limitations such as BFR interventions that were usually conducted after fatiguing protocols or fitness tests, which may not represent the real exercise (e.g., a sprint session of 6 sets of 50 m may induce muscle damage but it does not represent the demands of a team sport like rugby or soccer); (iii) there is a lack of consistency in BFR protocols (e.g., number of cycles or duration of the occlusion-reperfusion periods) for recovery; (iv) some studies showed beneficial effects while others found no positive or detrimental effects of BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy in comparison with the control/SHAM group. In conclusion, only 11 studies investigated BFR as a post-exercise recovery strategy and there is not any significant amount of evidence in team or individual sports (especially in female populations). BFR could be a potential post-exercise recovery strategy, but practitioners should use caution when applying this method of recovery for their athletes and clients. In addition, it would be of interest for high performance-related practitioners to have a better understanding of the benefits of BFR interventions combined with either active or passive forms of exercise as a post-exercise recovery strategy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biology of Sport
Biology of Sport 生物-运动科学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biology of Sport is the official journal of the Institute of Sport in Warsaw, Poland, published since 1984. Biology of Sport is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly in both paper and electronic format. The journal publishes articles concerning basic and applied sciences in sport: sports and exercise physiology, sports immunology and medicine, sports genetics, training and testing, pharmacology, as well as in other biological aspects related to sport. Priority is given to inter-disciplinary papers.
×
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