Key result
Repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction matches unrestricted training for power output despite ~15% lower external loads.
Why the study?
To examine performance and physiological adaptations following 3 weeks of repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction compared to unrestricted training.
Does repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction improve repeated-sprint ability and physiological adaptations compared to unrestricted training in adult male team-sport players?
Does repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction improve repeated-sprint ability and physiological adaptations compared to unrestricted training in adult male team-sport players?
Repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction yields similar performance and physiological adaptations as unrestricted training, despite lower external training loads.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May permit lower-load repeated-sprint training in team-sport athletes; leaves open confirmation of augmented adaptations in larger trials.
PURPOSE: This study examined performance and physiological adaptations following 3 weeks of repeated-sprint training (RST) with blood-flow restriction (BFR) or without (non-BFR). METHODS: Twenty-six semiprofessional and amateur adult male team-sport players were assessed for repeated-sprint ability, anaerobic capacity, leg lean mass, neuromuscular function, and maximal aerobic capacity before and after RST. Participants completed 9 cycling RST sessions (3 sets of 5-7 × 5-s sprints, 25-s passive recovery, 3-min rest) over a 3-week period with BFR or non-BFR. RESULTS: During RST sessions, the BFR group demonstrated lower mean power output compared with non-BFR (-14.5%; g = 1.48; P = .001). Significant improvements (P < .05) in mean and peak power output during repeated-sprint ability (+4.1%; g = 0.42, and + 2.2%; g = 0.25, respectively) and anaerobic capacity (+4.8%; g = 0.47, and + 4.7%; g = 0.32, respectively) tests, leg lean mass (+2.0%; g = 0.16), and peak aerobic power (+3.3%; g = 0.25) were observed from pretesting to posttesting without any between-groups differences. No significant changes (P > .05) were observed for maximal isometric voluntary contraction and maximal aerobic capacity. Peak rate of force development decreased (P = .003) in both groups following RST (-14.6%; g = 0.65), without any between-groups differences. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated-sprint ability, anaerobic capacity, leg lean mass, and peak aerobic power improved following 3 weeks of RST; however, the addition of BFR did not further enhance adaptations. Interestingly, comparable improvements were achieved between groups despite lower external loads experienced during RST sessions with BFR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McKee et al. (2023) studied Semiprofessional and amateur team-sport players (n=26). Repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction vs. Repeated-sprint training without blood-flow restriction was evaluated on Mean power output during repeated-sprint ability. Repeated-sprint training with blood-flow restriction yielded similar improvements in mean power output to unrestricted training, despite lower external loads.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: