scholarly journals Acute Effects of Continuous and Intermittent Blood Flow Restriction on Movement Velocity During Bench Press Exercise Against Different Loads

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Wilk ◽  
Mariola Gepfert ◽  
Michal Krzysztofik ◽  
Petr Stastny ◽  
Adam Zajac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Arterial Occlusion ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Experimental Session ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Bar Velocity

This study evaluated the effects of continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction (BFR) with 70% of full arterial occlusion pressure on bar velocity during the bench press exercise against a wide range of resistive loads. Eleven strength-trained males (age: 23.5 ± 1.4 years; resistance training experience: 2.8 ± 0.8 years, maximal bench press strength – 1RM = 101.8 ± 13.9 kg; body mass = 79.8 ± 10.4 kg), performed three different testing protocols in random and counterbalanced order: without BFR (NO-BFR); intermittent BFR (I-BFR) and continuous BFR (C-BFR). During each experimental session, subjects performed eight sets of two repetitions each, with increasing loads from 20 to 90% 1RM (10% steps), and 3 min rest between each set. In the C-BFR condition occlusion was kept throughout the trial, while in the I-BFR, occlusion was released during each 3 min rest interval. Peak bar velocity (PV) during the bench press exercise was higher by 12–17% in both I-BFR and C-BFR compared with NO-BFR only at the loads of 20, 30, 40, and 50% 1RM (p < 0.001), while performance at higher loads remained unchanged. Mean bar velocity (MV) was unaffected by occlusion (p = 0.342). These results indicate that BFR during bench press exercise increases PV and this may be used as an enhanced stimulus during explosive resistance training. At higher workloads, bench press performance was not negatively affected by BFR, indicating that the benefits of exercise under occlusion can be obtained while explosive performance is not impaired.

scholarly journals Acute Effects of Different Blood Flow Restriction Protocols on Bar Velocity During the Squat Exercise

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Wilk ◽  
Robert Trybulski ◽  
Michal Krzysztofik ◽  
Grzegorz Wojdala ◽  
Yuri Campos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Training Session ◽  
Arterial Occlusion ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Experimental Session ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Squat Exercise ◽  
Body Resistance ◽  
Bar Velocity

The main goal of the present study was to evaluate the effects of different blood flow restriction (BFR) protocols (continuous and intermittent) on peak bar velocity (PV) and mean bar velocity (MV) during the squat exercise at progressive loads, from 40 to 90% 1RM. Eleven healthy men (age = 23.4 ± 3.1 years; body mass = 88.5 ± 12.1 kg; squat 1RM = 183.2 ± 30.7 kg; resistance training experience, 5.7 ± 3.6 years) performed experimental sessions once a week for 3 weeks in random and counterbalanced order: without BFR (NO-BFR), with intermittent BFR (I-BFR), and with continuous BFR (C-BFR). During the experimental session, the participants performed six sets of the barbell squat exercise with loads from 40 to 90% 1RM. In each set, they performed two repetitions. During the C-BFR session, the cuffs were maintained throughout the training session. During the I-BFR, the cuffs were used only during the exercise and released for each rest interval. The BFR pressure was set to ∼80% arterial occlusion pressure (AOP). Analyses of variance showed a statistically significant interaction for MV (p < 0.02; η2 = 0.18). However, the post hoc analysis did not show significant differences between particular conditions for particular loads. There was no significant condition × load interaction for PV (p = 0.16; η2 = 0.13). Furthermore, there were no main effects for conditions in MV (p = 0.38; η2 = 0.09) as well as in PV (p = 0.94; η2 = 0.01). The results indicate that the different BFR protocols used during lower body resistance exercises did not reduce peak bar velocity and mean bar velocity during the squat exercise performed with various loads.

Short-Term Blood Flow Restriction Increases Power Output and Bar Velocity During the Bench Press

2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Wilk ◽  
Michal Krzysztofik ◽  
Aleksandra Filip ◽  
Adam Zajac ◽  
Gregory C. Bogdanis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Bar Velocity

scholarly journals Does Post-Activation Performance Enhancement Occur during the Bench Press Exercise under Blood Flow Restriction?

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Wilk ◽  
Michal Krzysztofik ◽  
Aleksandra Filip ◽  
Agnieszka Szkudlarek ◽  
Robert G. Lockie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Performance Enhancement ◽  
T Test ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Bar Velocity ◽  
Post Hoc

Background: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) during successive sets of the bench press (BP) exercise under blood flow restriction (BFR). Methods: The study included 10 strength-trained males (age = 29.8 ± 4.6 years; body mass = 94.3 ± 3.6 kg; BP 1-repetition maximum (1RM) = 168.5 ± 26.4 kg). The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, where each participant performed two different exercise protocols: under blood flow restriction (BFR) and control test protocol (CONT) without blood flow restriction. During the experimental sessions, the study participants performed 3 sets of 3 repetitions of the BP exercise at 70%1RM with a 5 min rest interval between sets. The differences in peak power output (PP), mean power output (MP), peak bar velocity (PV), and mean bar velocity (MV) between the CONT and BFR conditions were examined using 2-way (condition × set) repeated measures ANOVA. Furthermore, t-test comparisons between conditions were made for the set 2–set 1, set 3–set 1, and set 3–set 2 delta values for all variables. Results: The post hoc results for condition × set interaction in PP showed a significant increase in set 2 compared to set 1 for BFR (p < 0.01) and CONT (p = 0.01) conditions, a significant increase in set 3 compared to set 1 for the CONT (p = 0.01) condition, as well as a significant decrease in set 3 compared to set 1 for BFR condition occurred (p < 0.01). The post hoc results for condition × set interaction in PV showed a significant increase in set 2 compared to set 1 for BFR (p < 0.01) and CONT (p = 0.01) conditions, a significant increase in set 3 compared to set 1 for CONT (p = 0.03) condition, as well as a significant decrease in set 3 compared to set 1 for BFR condition (p < 0.01). The t-test comparisons showed significant differences in PP (p < 0.01) and PV (p = 0.01) for set 3–set 2 delta values between BFR and CONT conditions. Conclusion: The PAPE effect was analyzed through changes in power output and bar velocity that occurred under both the CONT and BFR conditions. However, the effects of PAPE have different kinetics in successive sets for BFR and for CONT conditions.

scholarly journals The Perceived Tightness Scale Does Not Provide Reliable Estimates of Blood Flow Restriction Pressure

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 516-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary W. Bell ◽  
Scott J. Dankel ◽  
Robert W. Spitz ◽  
Raksha N. Chatakondi ◽  
Takashi Abe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Arterial Occlusion ◽  
Credible Interval ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Perceived Pressure

Context: The perceived tightness scale is suggested to be an effective method for setting subocclusive pressures with practical blood flow restriction. However, the reliability of this scale is unknown and is important as the reliability will ultimately dictate the usefulness of this method. Objective: To determine the reliability of the perceived tightness scale and investigate if the reliability differs by sex. Design: Within-participant, repeated-measures. Setting: University laboratory. Participants: Twenty-four participants (12 men and 12 women) were tested over 3 days. Main Outcome Measures: Arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and the pressure at which the participants rated a 7 out of 10 on the perceived tightness scale in the upper arm and upper leg. Results: The percentage coefficient of variation for the measurement was approximately 12%, with no effect of sex in the upper (median δ [95% credible interval]: 0.016 [−0.741, 0.752]) or lower body (median δ [95% credible interval]: 0.266 [−0.396, 0.999]). This would produce an overestimation/underestimation of ∼25% from the mean perceived pressure in the upper body and ∼20% in the lower body. Participants rated pressures above their AOP for the upper body and below for the lower body. At the group level, there were differences in participants’ ratings for their relative AOP (7 out of 10) between day 1 and days 2 and 3 for the lower body, but no differences between sexes for the upper or lower body. Conclusions: The use of the perceived tightness scale does not provide reliable estimates of relative pressures over multiple visits. This method resulted in a wide range of relative AOPs within the same individual across days. This may preclude the use of this scale to set the pressure for those implementing practical blood flow restriction in the laboratory, gym, or clinic.

scholarly journals The Effects of Ischemia During Rest Intervals on Bar Velocity in the Bench Press Exercise With Different External Loads

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakub Jarosz ◽  
Robert Trybulski ◽  
Michał Krzysztofik ◽  
Athanasios Tsoukos ◽  
Aleksandra Filip-Stachnik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Cuff Pressure ◽  
Arterial Occlusion ◽  
Experimental Session ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Significant Interaction Effect ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Rest Periods ◽  
Bar Velocity

The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the acute effects of ischemia used during rest periods on bar velocity changes during the bench press exercise at progressive loads, from 20 to 90% of 1RM. Ten healthy resistance trained men volunteered for the study (age = 26.3 ± 4.7 years; body mass = 89.8 ± 6.3 kg; bench press 1RM = 142.5 ± 16.9 kg; training experience = 7.8 ± 2.7 years). During the experimental sessions the subjects performed the bench press exercise under two different conditions, in a randomized and counterbalanced order: (a) ischemia condition, with ischemia applied before the first set and during every rest periods between sets, and (b) control condition where no ischemia was applied. During each experimental session eight sets of the bench press exercise were performed, against loads starting from 20 to 90% 1RM, increased progressively by 10% in each subsequent set. A 3-min rest interval between sets was used. For ischemia condition the cuffs was applied 3 min before the first set and during every rest period between sets. Ischemia was released during exercise. The cuff pressure was set to ∼80% of full arterial occlusion pressure. The two-way repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant interaction effect for peak bar velocity (p = 0.04) and for mean bar velocity (p = 0.01). There was also a statistically significant main effect of condition for peak bar velocity (p &lt; 0.01) but not for mean bar velocity (p = 0.25). The post hoc analysis for interaction showed significantly higher peak bar velocity for the ischemia condition compared to control at a load of 20% 1RM (p = 0.007) and at a load of 50% 1RM (p = 0.006). The results of the present study indicate that ischemia used before each set even for a brief duration of &lt;3 min, has positive effects on peak bar velocity at light loads, but it is insufficient to induce such effect on higher loads.

Acute impact of blood flow restriction on strength-endurance performance during the bench press exercise

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariola Gepfert ◽  
Jakub Jarosz ◽  
Grzegorz Wojdala ◽  
Michal Krzysztofik ◽  
Yuri Campos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Endurance Performance ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Flow Restriction

Does Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training Improve Knee-Extensor Strength, Function, and Reduce Patient-Reported Pain? A Critically Appraised Topic

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Matthew Zaremba ◽  
Joel Martin ◽  
Marcie Fyock-Martin
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Knee Injury ◽  
Strength Function ◽  
Knee Extensor ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
And Function ◽  
Knee Pathology

Clinical Scenario: Knee pathologies often require rehabilitation to address the loss of knee-extensor (KE) strength, function, and heightened pain. However, in the early stages of rehabilitation, higher loads may be contraindicated. Blood flow restriction (BFR) resistance training does not require high loads and has been used clinically to promote strength improvements in a variety of injured populations. BFR resistance training may be an effective alternative to high-intensity resistance training during early rehabilitation of knee pathologies. Clinical Question: Following a knee injury, does BFR resistance training improve KE strength and function, and reduce patient-reported pain? Summary of Key Findings: Four randomized controlled trial studies met the inclusion criteria. Each included study evaluated the use of BFR resistance training on knee pathologies and the effects on KE strength, functional outcomes, and pain compared with high- or low-load resistance training. All 4 studies reported significant improvements in KE strength, function, and pain through a variety of outcome measures, following BFR resistance training use as the treatment. Clinical Bottom Line: There is consistent evidence to support the use of BFR resistance training as a treatment intervention following knee injury and as a means to improve KE strength and function and to reduce pain. Strength of Recommendation: Grade A evidence supporting the use of BFR resistance training for improvement in KE strength and function, and the reduction of patient-reported pain following an acute or chronic knee pathology.

Practical blood flow restriction training increases muscle hypertrophy during a periodized resistance training programme

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan P. Lowery ◽  
Jordan M. Joy ◽  
Jeremy P. Loenneke ◽  
Eduardo O. de Souza ◽  
Marco Machado ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Hypertrophy ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Resistance Training Programme

Effects of exercise intensity and occlusion pressure after 12 weeks of resistance training with blood-flow restriction

2015 ◽  
Vol 115 (12) ◽  
pp. 2471-2480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manoel E. Lixandrão ◽  
Carlos Ugrinowitsch ◽  
Gilberto Laurentino ◽  
Cleiton A. Libardi ◽  
André Y. Aihara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Exercise Intensity ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Occlusion Pressure ◽  
Flow Restriction

Training response to 8 weeks of blood flow restricted training is not improved by preferentially altering tissue hypoxia or lactate accumulation when training to repetition failure

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Neil Morley ◽  
Shane Ferth ◽  
Mathew Ian Bergens Debenham ◽  
Matthew Boston ◽  
Geoffrey Alonzo Power ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Blood Lactate ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Moderate Pressure ◽  
Muscular Endurance ◽  
Occlusion Pressure ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Traditional Resistance Training

Despite compelling muscular structure and function changes resulting from blood flow restricted (BFR) resistance training, mechanisms of action remain poorly characterized. Alterations in tissue O2 saturation (TSI%) and metabolites are potential drivers of observed changes, but their relationships with degree of occlusion pressure are unclear. We examined local TSI% and blood lactate (BL) concentration during BFR training to failure using different occlusion pressures on strength, hypertrophy, and muscular endurance over an 8-week training period. Twenty participants (11M:9F) trained 3/wk for 8wk using high pressure (100% resting limb occlusion pressure, LOP, 20%1RM), moderate pressure (50% LOP, 20%1RM), or traditional resistance training (70%1RM). Strength, size, and muscular endurance were measured pre/post training. TSI% and BL were quantified during a training session. Despite overall increases, no group preferentially increased strength, hypertrophy, or muscular endurance (p>0.05). Neither TSI% nor BL concentration differed between groups (p>0.05). Moderate pressure resulted in greater accumulated deoxygenation stress (TSI%*time) (-6352±3081, -3939±1835, -2532±1349 au for moderate pressure, high pressure, and TRT, p=0.018). We demonstrate that BFR training to task-failure elicits similar strength, hypertrophy, and muscular endurance changes to traditional resistance training. Further, varied occlusion pressure does not impact these outcomes, nor elicit changes in TSI% or BL concentrations. Novelty Bullets • Training to task failure with low-load blood flow restriction elicits similar improvements to traditional resistance training, regardless of occlusion pressure. • During blood flow restriction, altering occlusion pressure does not proportionally impact tissue O2 saturation nor blood lactate concentrations

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document