Comparing adaptations from blood flow restriction exercise training using regulated or unregulated pressure systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Clinical Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1177/02692155241271040
Matthew J Clarkson, Breanna McMahon, Stuart A Warmington
{"title":"Comparing adaptations from blood flow restriction exercise training using regulated or unregulated pressure systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Matthew J Clarkson, Breanna McMahon, Stuart A Warmington","doi":"10.1177/02692155241271040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>No study has examined outcomes derived from blood flow restriction exercise training interventions using <i>regulated</i> compared with <i>unregulated</i> blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, we used a systematic review and meta-analyses to compare the chronic adaptations to blood flow restriction exercise training achieved with <i>regulated</i> and <i>unregulated</i> blood flow restriction pressure systems.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The electronic database search included using the tool EBSCOhost and other online database search engines. The search included Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Embase and SpringerLink.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Included studies utilised chronic blood flow restriction exercise training interventions greater than two weeks duration, where blood flow restriction was applied using a <i>regulated</i> or <i>unregulated</i> blood flow restriction pressure system, and where outcome measures such as muscle strength, muscle size or physical function were measured both pre- and post-training. Studies included in the meta-analyses used an equivalent non-blood flow restriction exercise comparison group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Data showed that <i>regulated</i> (<i>n</i> = 47) and <i>unregulated</i> (<i>n</i> = 34) blood flow restriction pressure systems yield similar training adaptations for all outcome measures post-intervention. For muscle strength and muscle size, this was reaffirmed in the included meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review indicates that practitioners may achieve comparable training adaptations with blood flow restriction exercise training using either <i>regulated</i> or <i>unregulated</i> blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, additional factors such as device quality, participant comfort and safety, cost and convenience are important factors to consider when deciding on appropriate equipment to use when prescribing blood flow restriction exercise training.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1446-1465"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11528959/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241271040","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: No study has examined outcomes derived from blood flow restriction exercise training interventions using regulated compared with unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, we used a systematic review and meta-analyses to compare the chronic adaptations to blood flow restriction exercise training achieved with regulated and unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems.

Data sources: The electronic database search included using the tool EBSCOhost and other online database search engines. The search included Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Embase and SpringerLink.

Methods: Included studies utilised chronic blood flow restriction exercise training interventions greater than two weeks duration, where blood flow restriction was applied using a regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure system, and where outcome measures such as muscle strength, muscle size or physical function were measured both pre- and post-training. Studies included in the meta-analyses used an equivalent non-blood flow restriction exercise comparison group.

Results: Eighty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Data showed that regulated (n = 47) and unregulated (n = 34) blood flow restriction pressure systems yield similar training adaptations for all outcome measures post-intervention. For muscle strength and muscle size, this was reaffirmed in the included meta-analyses.

Conclusion: This review indicates that practitioners may achieve comparable training adaptations with blood flow restriction exercise training using either regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, additional factors such as device quality, participant comfort and safety, cost and convenience are important factors to consider when deciding on appropriate equipment to use when prescribing blood flow restriction exercise training.

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
比较使用调压系统或非调压系统进行血流限制运动训练的适应性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:目前还没有研究对使用调节型血流限制压力系统和非调节型血流限制压力系统进行血流限制运动训练干预的结果进行研究。因此,我们采用系统综述和荟萃分析的方法,比较使用有调节和无调节血流限制压力系统进行血流限制运动训练所产生的慢性适应性:电子数据库搜索包括使用工具 EBSCOhost 和其他在线数据库搜索引擎。检索包括 Medline、SPORTDiscus、CINAHL、Embase 和 SpringerLink:纳入的研究均采用持续时间超过两周的慢性血流限制运动训练干预措施,使用调节或非调节血流限制压力系统进行血流限制,并在训练前和训练后测量肌肉力量、肌肉大小或身体功能等结果指标。纳入荟萃分析的研究使用了同等的非血流限制运动对比组:系统综述共纳入 81 项研究。数据显示,调节型(n = 47)和非调节型(n = 34)血流限制压力系统对干预后的所有结果测量产生了相似的训练适应性。在肌肉力量和肌肉大小方面,纳入的荟萃分析再次证实了这一点:本综述表明,无论是使用调节型还是非调节型血流限制压力系统,从业人员都可以通过血流限制运动训练获得相似的训练适应性。因此,在决定使用何种设备进行血流限制运动训练时,设备质量、参与者的舒适度和安全性、成本和便利性等其他因素都是需要考虑的重要因素。
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
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
The 9-item Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-9) has adequate measurement properties in patients with chronic low back pain. A scoping review on motor imagery-based rehabilitation: Potential working mechanisms and clinical application for cognitive function and depression. The effect of brief, repetitive balance training on balance and fall risk in older people with stroke: A randomized controlled trial. "Together is no longer completely together": Exploring the influence of social cognition problems on partner relationships following acquired brain injury. Kinesophobia in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a latent profile analysis.
×
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