有血流限制和无血流限制的阻力训练在成人中引起的慢性血流动力学适应:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 2.3 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Sports Medicine and Health Science Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.smhs.2023.09.006
Allison Russo , Giorjines Boppre , Cristine Schmidt , Lucimere Bohn
{"title":"有血流限制和无血流限制的阻力训练在成人中引起的慢性血流动力学适应:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Allison Russo ,&nbsp;Giorjines Boppre ,&nbsp;Cristine Schmidt ,&nbsp;Lucimere Bohn","doi":"10.1016/j.smhs.2023.09.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The purposes of this systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed literature were to examine the chronic effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction (RT-BFR) on hemodynamics, and to compare these adaptations to those induced by traditional resistance training (TRT) programs in adults (PROSPERO: Registry: CRD42022339510). A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Sports Discus, Scielo, and Web of Science databases. Two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics and blood pressure measures. Risk of bias (The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials [RoB-2]), and the certainty of the evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE]) were used. A total of eight studies met the inclusion criteria for systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Regarding the comparison of RT-BFR <em>vs.</em> non-exercise, no significant differences favoring the exercise group were observed (<em>p</em> ​&gt; ​0.05). However, when compared to TRT, RT-BFR elicited additional improvements on DBP (−3.35; 95%<em>CI</em> -6.00 to −0.71; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> ​= ​14%; <em>z</em> ​= ​−2.48, <em>p</em> ​= ​0.01), and on MAP (−3.96; 95%<em>CI</em> -7.94 to 0.02; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> ​= ​43%; <em>z</em> ​= ​−1.95, <em>p</em> ​= ​0.05). Results indicate that RT-BFR may elicit a decrease in DBP in comparison with TRT, but the lack of data addressing this topic makes any conclusion speculative. Future research on this topic is warranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33620,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine and Health Science","volume":"5 4","pages":"Pages 259-268"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666337623000677/pdfft?md5=f44dd6af4420f7776de73be9013321f4&pid=1-s2.0-S2666337623000677-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chronic hemodynamic adaptations induced by resistance training with and without blood flow restriction in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Allison Russo ,&nbsp;Giorjines Boppre ,&nbsp;Cristine Schmidt ,&nbsp;Lucimere Bohn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.smhs.2023.09.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The purposes of this systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed literature were to examine the chronic effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction (RT-BFR) on hemodynamics, and to compare these adaptations to those induced by traditional resistance training (TRT) programs in adults (PROSPERO: Registry: CRD42022339510). A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Sports Discus, Scielo, and Web of Science databases. Two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics and blood pressure measures. Risk of bias (The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials [RoB-2]), and the certainty of the evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE]) were used. A total of eight studies met the inclusion criteria for systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Regarding the comparison of RT-BFR <em>vs.</em> non-exercise, no significant differences favoring the exercise group were observed (<em>p</em> ​&gt; ​0.05). However, when compared to TRT, RT-BFR elicited additional improvements on DBP (−3.35; 95%<em>CI</em> -6.00 to −0.71; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> ​= ​14%; <em>z</em> ​= ​−2.48, <em>p</em> ​= ​0.01), and on MAP (−3.96; 95%<em>CI</em> -7.94 to 0.02; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> ​= ​43%; <em>z</em> ​= ​−1.95, <em>p</em> ​= ​0.05). Results indicate that RT-BFR may elicit a decrease in DBP in comparison with TRT, but the lack of data addressing this topic makes any conclusion speculative. Future research on this topic is warranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Medicine and Health Science\",\"volume\":\"5 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 259-268\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666337623000677/pdfft?md5=f44dd6af4420f7776de73be9013321f4&pid=1-s2.0-S2666337623000677-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Medicine and Health Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666337623000677\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine and Health Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666337623000677","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述和同行评议文献荟萃分析的目的是研究限制血流阻力训练(RT-BFR)对血液动力学的慢性影响,并将这些适应性与传统阻力训练(TRT)项目对成年人的适应性进行比较(PROSPERO:注册号:CRD42022339510)。我们在 PubMed、Sports Discus、Scielo 和 Web of Science 数据库中进行了文献检索。两位独立审稿人提取了研究特征和血压测量值。采用了偏倚风险(用于随机对照试验的 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具 [RoB-2])和证据的确定性(推荐、评估、发展和评价分级 [GRADE])。共有八项研究符合收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)和平均动脉压(MAP)的纳入标准。关于 RT-BFR 与非运动的比较,未观察到有利于运动组的显著差异(p > 0.05)。然而,与 TRT 相比,RT-BFR 对 DBP(-3.35;95%CI -6.00 至 -0.71;I2 = 14%;z = -2.48,p = 0.01)和 MAP(-3.96;95%CI -7.94 至 0.02;I2 = 43%;z = -1.95,p = 0.05)有额外改善。结果表明,与 TRT 相比,RT-BFR 可能会引起 DBP 的下降,但由于缺乏相关数据,任何结论都是推测性的。未来有必要对这一主题进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Chronic hemodynamic adaptations induced by resistance training with and without blood flow restriction in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The purposes of this systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed literature were to examine the chronic effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction (RT-BFR) on hemodynamics, and to compare these adaptations to those induced by traditional resistance training (TRT) programs in adults (PROSPERO: Registry: CRD42022339510). A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Sports Discus, Scielo, and Web of Science databases. Two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics and blood pressure measures. Risk of bias (The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials [RoB-2]), and the certainty of the evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE]) were used. A total of eight studies met the inclusion criteria for systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Regarding the comparison of RT-BFR vs. non-exercise, no significant differences favoring the exercise group were observed (p ​> ​0.05). However, when compared to TRT, RT-BFR elicited additional improvements on DBP (−3.35; 95%CI -6.00 to −0.71; I2 ​= ​14%; z ​= ​−2.48, p ​= ​0.01), and on MAP (−3.96; 95%CI -7.94 to 0.02; I2 ​= ​43%; z ​= ​−1.95, p ​= ​0.05). Results indicate that RT-BFR may elicit a decrease in DBP in comparison with TRT, but the lack of data addressing this topic makes any conclusion speculative. Future research on this topic is warranted.

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
Sports Medicine and Health Science
Sports Medicine and Health Science Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
55 days
期刊最新文献
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular health in sedentary and athletes: Consensus, uncertainties, and ways for mitigation The effects of prolonged sitting behavior on resting-state brain functional connectivity in college students post-COVID-19 rehabilitation: A study based on fNIRS technology Effects of COVID-19 on the cardiovascular system: A mendelian randomization study Relationship between infection, physical and mental health and exercise habits of some Chinese residents after recovery from COVID-19 Changes in physical activity and sleep following the COVID-19 pandemic on a university campus: Perception versus reality
×
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