中等强度血流限制技术伴或不伴运动意象的镇痛效果:一项单盲随机对照试验

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Somatosensory and Motor Research Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-13 DOI:10.1080/08990220.2021.1987876
Clovis Varangot-Reille, Ferran Cuenca-Martínez, Luis Suso-Martí, Roy La Touche, Amélie Rouquette, Julie Hamon, Maxime Araldi, Francisco de Asís-Fernández, Aida Herranz-Gómez
{"title":"中等强度血流限制技术伴或不伴运动意象的镇痛效果:一项单盲随机对照试验","authors":"Clovis Varangot-Reille,&nbsp;Ferran Cuenca-Martínez,&nbsp;Luis Suso-Martí,&nbsp;Roy La Touche,&nbsp;Amélie Rouquette,&nbsp;Julie Hamon,&nbsp;Maxime Araldi,&nbsp;Francisco de Asís-Fernández,&nbsp;Aida Herranz-Gómez","doi":"10.1080/08990220.2021.1987876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The main objective was to assess the hypoalgesic effect of adding blood flow restriction (BFR) training with or without motor imagery (MI) to moderate-intensity exercise. The secondary objective was to analyse the correlations of the pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) regarding perceived pain intensity, perceived fatigue, and cuff pressure discomfort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 42 asymptomatic participants were randomly assigned to 3 groups: control group (CG), BFR group, and BFR with MI group. All participants performed a squat exercise at an intensity of 60% of 1RM. For the BFR groups, blood occlusion occurred at 80% of maximal arterial occlusive pressure. Local, bilateral, and distal PPT were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and 48 h post-intervention. The perceived fatigue was assessed post-intervention, and pain intensity was assessed only 48 h post-intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were intragroup differences in the CG and BFR + MI group in the local PPT between the pre-intervention and post-intervention measurements (<i>p</i> = 0.039, <i>d</i>= -0.32 and <i>p</i> = 0.009, <i>d</i>= -0.46, respectively) and only in the CG in the bilateral PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.002, <i>d</i>= -0.41). The CG and BFR group showed significant differences at 48 h post-intervention, with a decrease in local PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.009, <i>d</i> = 0.51 and <i>p</i> = 0.049, <i>d</i> = 0.43, respectively) and bilateral PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.004, <i>d</i> = 0.53 and <i>p</i> = 0.021, <i>d</i> = 0.46, respectively). There was a negative moderate correlation between local PPT at the post-intervention time and perceived discomfort of the occlusion device only in the BFR group (<i>r</i>=-0.54, <i>p</i> = 0.045).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Moderate-intensity resistance training with high occlusion did not generate hypoalgesia but did appear to generate a hyperalgesic response within 48 h after the intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":49498,"journal":{"name":"Somatosensory and Motor Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hypoalgesic effects of a blood flow restriction technique at moderate intensity with or without motor imagery: a single-blind randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Clovis Varangot-Reille,&nbsp;Ferran Cuenca-Martínez,&nbsp;Luis Suso-Martí,&nbsp;Roy La Touche,&nbsp;Amélie Rouquette,&nbsp;Julie Hamon,&nbsp;Maxime Araldi,&nbsp;Francisco de Asís-Fernández,&nbsp;Aida Herranz-Gómez\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08990220.2021.1987876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The main objective was to assess the hypoalgesic effect of adding blood flow restriction (BFR) training with or without motor imagery (MI) to moderate-intensity exercise. The secondary objective was to analyse the correlations of the pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) regarding perceived pain intensity, perceived fatigue, and cuff pressure discomfort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 42 asymptomatic participants were randomly assigned to 3 groups: control group (CG), BFR group, and BFR with MI group. All participants performed a squat exercise at an intensity of 60% of 1RM. For the BFR groups, blood occlusion occurred at 80% of maximal arterial occlusive pressure. Local, bilateral, and distal PPT were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and 48 h post-intervention. The perceived fatigue was assessed post-intervention, and pain intensity was assessed only 48 h post-intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were intragroup differences in the CG and BFR + MI group in the local PPT between the pre-intervention and post-intervention measurements (<i>p</i> = 0.039, <i>d</i>= -0.32 and <i>p</i> = 0.009, <i>d</i>= -0.46, respectively) and only in the CG in the bilateral PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.002, <i>d</i>= -0.41). The CG and BFR group showed significant differences at 48 h post-intervention, with a decrease in local PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.009, <i>d</i> = 0.51 and <i>p</i> = 0.049, <i>d</i> = 0.43, respectively) and bilateral PPT (<i>p</i> = 0.004, <i>d</i> = 0.53 and <i>p</i> = 0.021, <i>d</i> = 0.46, respectively). There was a negative moderate correlation between local PPT at the post-intervention time and perceived discomfort of the occlusion device only in the BFR group (<i>r</i>=-0.54, <i>p</i> = 0.045).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Moderate-intensity resistance training with high occlusion did not generate hypoalgesia but did appear to generate a hyperalgesic response within 48 h after the intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Somatosensory and Motor Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Somatosensory and Motor Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08990220.2021.1987876\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Somatosensory and Motor Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08990220.2021.1987876","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:主要目的是评估在中等强度运动中加入血流限制(BFR)训练(有或没有运动想象(MI))的镇痛效果。次要目的是分析疼痛压力阈值(PPTs)与感知疼痛强度、感知疲劳和袖带压力不适之间的相关性。方法:将42例无症状患者随机分为3组:对照组(CG)、BFR组、BFR合并心肌梗死组。所有参与者都进行了深蹲运动,强度为1RM的60%。对于BFR组,血闭塞发生在最大动脉闭塞压的80%。在干预前、干预后和干预后48小时评估局部、双侧和远端PPT。干预后评估感知疲劳,仅在干预后48小时评估疼痛强度。结果:干预前和干预后,CG和BFR + MI组局部PPT的组内测量值分别有差异(p = 0.039, d= -0.32和p = 0.009, d= -0.46),仅双侧PPT的组内测量值有差异(p = 0.002, d= -0.41)。CG组和BFR组干预后48 h,局部PPT (p = 0.009, d = 0.51, p = 0.049, d = 0.43)和双侧PPT (p = 0.004, d = 0.53, p = 0.021, d = 0.46)均有显著性差异。仅在BFR组,干预后局部PPT与闭塞器感知不适感呈负相关(r=-0.54, p = 0.045)。结论:中等强度高咬合抗阻训练不产生痛觉减退,但干预后48小时内出现痛觉过敏反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hypoalgesic effects of a blood flow restriction technique at moderate intensity with or without motor imagery: a single-blind randomized controlled trial.

Purpose: The main objective was to assess the hypoalgesic effect of adding blood flow restriction (BFR) training with or without motor imagery (MI) to moderate-intensity exercise. The secondary objective was to analyse the correlations of the pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) regarding perceived pain intensity, perceived fatigue, and cuff pressure discomfort.

Methods: A sample of 42 asymptomatic participants were randomly assigned to 3 groups: control group (CG), BFR group, and BFR with MI group. All participants performed a squat exercise at an intensity of 60% of 1RM. For the BFR groups, blood occlusion occurred at 80% of maximal arterial occlusive pressure. Local, bilateral, and distal PPT were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and 48 h post-intervention. The perceived fatigue was assessed post-intervention, and pain intensity was assessed only 48 h post-intervention.

Results: There were intragroup differences in the CG and BFR + MI group in the local PPT between the pre-intervention and post-intervention measurements (p = 0.039, d= -0.32 and p = 0.009, d= -0.46, respectively) and only in the CG in the bilateral PPT (p = 0.002, d= -0.41). The CG and BFR group showed significant differences at 48 h post-intervention, with a decrease in local PPT (p = 0.009, d = 0.51 and p = 0.049, d = 0.43, respectively) and bilateral PPT (p = 0.004, d = 0.53 and p = 0.021, d = 0.46, respectively). There was a negative moderate correlation between local PPT at the post-intervention time and perceived discomfort of the occlusion device only in the BFR group (r=-0.54, p = 0.045).

Conclusion: Moderate-intensity resistance training with high occlusion did not generate hypoalgesia but did appear to generate a hyperalgesic response within 48 h after the intervention.

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
Somatosensory and Motor Research
Somatosensory and Motor Research 医学-神经科学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Somatosensory & Motor Research publishes original, high-quality papers that encompass the entire range of investigations related to the neural bases for somatic sensation, somatic motor function, somatic motor integration, and modeling thereof. Comprising anatomical, physiological, biochemical, pharmacological, behavioural, and psychophysical studies, Somatosensory & Motor Research covers all facets of the peripheral and central processes underlying cutaneous sensation, and includes studies relating to afferent and efferent mechanisms of deep structures (e.g., viscera, muscle). Studies of motor systems at all levels of the neuraxis are covered, but reports restricted to non-neural aspects of muscle generally would belong in other journals.
×
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