Key result
Low-load blood flow restriction training causes greater rest-period discomfort than standard low-load resistance exercise.
Why the study?
When performed to task failure, perceived discomfort following a single bout of LL-BFR versus LL-RE is equivocal, and it remains unclear how discomfort changes over time with training.
Does low-load blood flow restriction training increase perceived discomfort compared to standard low-load resistance exercise in resistance-trained males?
RCT (n=10)
Does low-load blood flow restriction training increase perceived discomfort compared to standard low-load resistance exercise in resistance-trained males?
p-value: p=< .02
The application of blood flow restriction throughout rest periods during low-load resistance exercise significantly increases perceived discomfort, with no habituation occurring over 6 weeks of regular training.
May limit LL-BFR adherence due to rest-period discomfort; leaves open whether mitigation strategies improve tolerability in larger trials.
Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training improves muscular adaptation compared to traditional low-load resistance exercise (LL-RE), when matched for work. However, when both are performed to task failure, similar improvements in muscular strength and hypertrophy occur. At task failure, the perceived discomfort after a single bout of LL-BFR or LL-RE is equivocal and it remains unclear how this might change over time with training. Therefore, we examined alterations in the perception of discomfort during LL-RE and LL-BFR training. Ten resistance-trained males performed both LL-RE and LL-BFR to failure, with each leg assigned to a different condition for 6 weeks. Perceived discomfort was obtained after each set and rest period during the 1st, 4th, 8th, 11th, and 15th training sessions using a 1000-pixel visual analog scale. Perceived discomfort was similar following each set for LL-RE and LL-BFR within each training session and did not change with training. At the end of rest periods, with the tourniquet still applied, a consistently greater discomfort was reported with LL-BFR (all P < .02), with no evidence for desensitization over time. Overall, participants reported similar discomfort following LL-RE and LL-BFR sets to failure; however, the application of BFR throughout rest periods increased discomfort, with no clear habituation with regular training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pignanelli et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Healthy resistance-trained males (n=10). Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training vs. Traditional low-load resistance exercise (LL-RE) was evaluated on Perceived discomfort after each set and rest period (p=< .02). Low-load blood flow restriction training to failure caused consistently greater perceived discomfort during rest periods compared to standard low-load resistance exercise (P < .02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: