Impact of limb occlusion pressure assessment position on performance, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses in blood flow restricted low-load resistance exercise: A randomized crossover trial.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Journal of Sports Sciences Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-10 DOI:10.1080/02640414.2024.2422205
Okan Kamiş, Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Neslihan Akçay, Kadir Keskin, Kerem Can Yıldız, Cem Sofuoğlu, Tim Werner, Luke Hughes
{"title":"Impact of limb occlusion pressure assessment position on performance, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses in blood flow restricted low-load resistance exercise: A randomized crossover trial.","authors":"Okan Kamiş, Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Neslihan Akçay, Kadir Keskin, Kerem Can Yıldız, Cem Sofuoğlu, Tim Werner, Luke Hughes","doi":"10.1080/02640414.2024.2422205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the effect of limb occlusion pressure (LOP) position on exercise performance, cardiovascular responses, and perceptual experiences during seated bilateral leg extensions with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty resistance-trained males (age: 22 ± 2 years; weight: 74.4 ± 13.6 kg; height: 177.4 ± 6.4 cm; BMI: 23.5 ± 3.3 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) participated. Each performed exercise to failure (4 sets, 30% 1RM, 1 min rest) in three conditions: Supine LOP-BFR, Seated LOP-BFR, and no-BFR. BFR was applied at 60% LOP. Significant interaction effects were found for RPE (<i>p</i> = 0.021, d = 0.76), RPD (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.72), and DOMS (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 2.28). Statistically significant fewer repetitions were completed in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.5), Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.0), and Seated LOP-BFR vs. Supine LOP-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.6). RPE was higher in Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.52). RPD was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.62) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 1.25). DOMS was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 0.77) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (<i>p</i> < 0.01, d = 3.52). Seated LOP-BFR increased perceptual demands and reduced repetitions compared to Supine LOP-BFR. Both LOP-BFR conditions reduced repetitions compared to no-BFR without affecting cardiovascular measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":17066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"2256-2264"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2024.2422205","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of limb occlusion pressure (LOP) position on exercise performance, cardiovascular responses, and perceptual experiences during seated bilateral leg extensions with and without blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirty resistance-trained males (age: 22 ± 2 years; weight: 74.4 ± 13.6 kg; height: 177.4 ± 6.4 cm; BMI: 23.5 ± 3.3 kg/m2) participated. Each performed exercise to failure (4 sets, 30% 1RM, 1 min rest) in three conditions: Supine LOP-BFR, Seated LOP-BFR, and no-BFR. BFR was applied at 60% LOP. Significant interaction effects were found for RPE (p = 0.021, d = 0.76), RPD (p < 0.01, d = 1.72), and DOMS (p < 0.01, d = 2.28). Statistically significant fewer repetitions were completed in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.5), Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 1.0), and Seated LOP-BFR vs. Supine LOP-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.6). RPE was higher in Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.52). RPD was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.62) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 1.25). DOMS was higher in Supine LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 0.77) and Seated LOP-BFR vs. no-BFR (p < 0.01, d = 3.52). Seated LOP-BFR increased perceptual demands and reduced repetitions compared to Supine LOP-BFR. Both LOP-BFR conditions reduced repetitions compared to no-BFR without affecting cardiovascular measures.

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
肢体闭塞压力评估位置对血流受限低负荷阻力运动中的表现、心血管和知觉反应的影响:随机交叉试验。
本研究调查了肢体闭塞压力(LOP)位置对有和无血流限制(BFR)的坐姿双腿伸展运动中的运动表现、心血管反应和感知体验的影响。30 名接受过阻力训练的男性(年龄:22 ± 2 岁;体重:74.4 ± 13.6 千克;身高:177.4 ± 6.4 厘米;体重指数:23.5 ± 3.3 千克/平方米)参加了此次活动。每人在三种条件下进行运动至失败(4 组,30% 1RM,休息 1 分钟):仰卧 LOP-BFR、坐姿 LOP-BFR 和无 BFR。在 60% LOP 时进行 BFR。结果发现,RPE(p = 0.021,d = 0.76)、RPD(p p p p p p p p p p p
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
Journal of Sports Sciences
Journal of Sports Sciences 社会科学-运动科学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
147
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sports Sciences has an international reputation for publishing articles of a high standard and is both Medline and Clarivate Analytics-listed. It publishes research on various aspects of the sports and exercise sciences, including anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, performance analysis, physiology, psychology, sports medicine and health, as well as coaching and talent identification, kinanthropometry and other interdisciplinary perspectives. The emphasis of the Journal is on the human sciences, broadly defined and applied to sport and exercise. Besides experimental work in human responses to exercise, the subjects covered will include human responses to technologies such as the design of sports equipment and playing facilities, research in training, selection, performance prediction or modification, and stress reduction or manifestation. Manuscripts considered for publication include those dealing with original investigations of exercise, validation of technological innovations in sport or comprehensive reviews of topics relevant to the scientific study of sport.
期刊最新文献
Does technology assist physical activity engagement in adolescent girls and young women? Repeated cross-sectional analysis. Effects of a 15-week recreational football programme on insulin resistance and glycaemic control in inactive premenopausal women with mild arterial hypertension: A randomised controlled trial. Smart swim goggles accurately measure heart rate during swim training: A criterion validation study. START-TO-LOW-RUN: The effect of a 10 week instructed running program on duty factor to reduce loading magnitude. Science or hype? Non-invasive brain stimulation and sport-specific performance: Evidence from a systematic review and three-level meta-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:604180095
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