Subject factors influencing blood flow restriction in the arm at low cuff pressures.

Autor: Meek AW; Department of Kinesiology, School of Health and Human Sciences, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA., Heavrin AM; Department of Exercise Science, Franklin College, Franklin, Indiana, USA., Mikesky AE; Department of Kinesiology, School of Health and Human Sciences, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA., Segal NA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Missouri, USA., Riley ZA; Department of Kinesiology, School of Health and Human Sciences, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Clinical physiology and functional imaging [Clin Physiol Funct Imaging] 2022 Jul; Vol. 42 (4), pp. 233-240. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Apr 03.
DOI: 10.1111/cpf.12752
Abstrakt: Background: Limb circumference predicts the pressure needed for complete occlusion. However, that relationship is inconsistent at moderate pressures typical of effective blood flow restriction (BFR) training. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of subject factors on BFR at low restriction pressures in the arm.
Methods: Fifty subjects had arm anthropometrics assessed by peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT), sum of skinfold thickness (sumSKF) and Gulick tape (Gulick tape circumference [Gulick Circ.]) at cuff level. Blood flow (BF) was measured with ultrasound at baseline and five restrictive pressures (20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 mmHg). Relationships between subject characteristics and BFR were assessed using Pearson's correlations and hierarchical regression.
Results: BF decreased (p < 0.05) at each incremental pressure. Regression models including percent muscle composition (%Muscle), pQCT circumference and systolic blood pressure (SBP), were significant at all five pressures (R 2  = 0.18-0.49). %Muscle explained the most variance at each pressure. Regression models including sumSKF, Gulick Circ. and SBP, were significant at 30-60 mmHg (R 2  = 0.28-0.49). SumSKF explained the most variance at each pressure.
Conclusions: At low pressures (20-60 mmHg), there is considerable variability in the magnitude of BFR across individuals. Arm composition factors (muscle and fat) explained the greatest variance at each cuff pressure and may be the most important consideration when using BFR protocols.
(© 2022 Scandinavian Society of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: