Effect of Aerobic Training with Blood Flow Restriction on Strength and Hypertrophy: A Meta-analysis.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES International journal of sports medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1055/a-2240-7659
Carlos Alberto Toledo Teixeira Filho, Eduardo Pizzo Junior, Julia Waszczuk Vendrame, Gabriel Martins Da Silva, Allysie Priscilla de Souza Cavina, Leonardo Kesrouani Lemos, Franciele Marques Vanderlei
{"title":"Effect of Aerobic Training with Blood Flow Restriction on Strength and Hypertrophy: A Meta-analysis.","authors":"Carlos Alberto Toledo Teixeira Filho, Eduardo Pizzo Junior, Julia Waszczuk Vendrame, Gabriel Martins Da Silva, Allysie Priscilla de Souza Cavina, Leonardo Kesrouani Lemos, Franciele Marques Vanderlei","doi":"10.1055/a-2240-7659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the effects on muscle strength and hypertrophy of low and high-intensity aerobic training with BFR (LI-BFR and HI-BFR) versus low and high-intensity aerobic training without BFR (LI and HI). The search was performed in five databases, by two independent researchers, and the terms and keywords used to optimize the searches were related to blood flow restriction and aerobic training. All studies were evaluated for methodological quality using the PEDro scale and for quality of evidence using the GRADE system. Meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. After data extraction, 11 studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The results of the overall analysis between LI-BFR vs. LI showed a significant difference in muscle strength of knee extensors; for hypertrophy, LI was superior to LI-BFR with clinical relevance. Comparing HI-BFR vs. HI there was no superiority for muscle strength. In conclusion, for strength gains very low-quality evidence was found to support no superiority between LI-BFR and HI-BFR compared to LI and HI, respectively. For muscle hypertrophy, superiority of LI was found compared to LI-BFR, with a very low level of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":14439,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2240-7659","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the effects on muscle strength and hypertrophy of low and high-intensity aerobic training with BFR (LI-BFR and HI-BFR) versus low and high-intensity aerobic training without BFR (LI and HI). The search was performed in five databases, by two independent researchers, and the terms and keywords used to optimize the searches were related to blood flow restriction and aerobic training. All studies were evaluated for methodological quality using the PEDro scale and for quality of evidence using the GRADE system. Meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. After data extraction, 11 studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The results of the overall analysis between LI-BFR vs. LI showed a significant difference in muscle strength of knee extensors; for hypertrophy, LI was superior to LI-BFR with clinical relevance. Comparing HI-BFR vs. HI there was no superiority for muscle strength. In conclusion, for strength gains very low-quality evidence was found to support no superiority between LI-BFR and HI-BFR compared to LI and HI, respectively. For muscle hypertrophy, superiority of LI was found compared to LI-BFR, with a very low level of evidence.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
限制血流的有氧训练对力量和肥大的影响:一项荟萃分析。
这项荟萃分析的目的是比较低强度和高强度有氧训练(含血流阻断)(LI-BFR 和 HI-BFR)与低强度和高强度有氧训练(不含血流阻断)(LI 和 HI)对肌肉力量和肥厚的影响。搜索由两名独立研究人员在五个数据库中进行,用于优化搜索的术语和关键词与血流限制和有氧训练有关。所有研究均采用 PEDro 量表进行方法学质量评估,并采用 GRADE 系统进行证据质量评估。使用 RevMan 软件进行了元分析。经过数据提取,有 11 项研究符合所有资格标准,被纳入系统综述。对LI-BFR与LI的总体分析结果显示,在膝关节伸肌肌力方面存在显著差异,在肥大方面,LI优于LI-BFR,具有临床意义。在肌肉力量方面,HI-BFR 与 HI 相比没有优势。总之,在力量增强方面,低质量的证据表明,LI-BFR 和 HI-BFR 与 LI 和 HI 相比没有优势。在肌肉肥大方面,与 LI-BFR 相比,LI 具有优越性,但证据水平很低。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The IJSM provides a forum for the publication of papers dealing with both basic and applied information that advance the field of sports medicine and exercise science, and offer a better understanding of biomedicine. The journal publishes original papers, reviews, short communications, and letters to the Editors.
期刊最新文献
Link Between Ferritin, Vitamin D, Performance, and Eating Attitudes in Female Athletes. Repeated Sprint Variations According to Circadian Rhythm at Different Menstrual Cycle Phases. Cycling Intensity Effect on Running Plus Cycling Performance among Triathletes. Bridging Gaps in Wearable Technology for Exercise and Health Professionals: A Brief Review. Comparison of Isometric and Dynamic Bridging Exercises on Low Back Muscle Oxygenation.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1