Blood flow restriction training at 70% and 80% arterial occlusion pressure significantly increased muscle activation compared to 0% and 60% pressures, with 70% achieving similar physiological outcomes as 80% but with lower perceived exertion.
Does blood flow restriction training at varying arterial occlusion pressures improve muscle activation and metabolic stress in healthy young males?
BFRT at 70% AOP provides optimal acute neuromuscular and metabolic stimuli comparable to 80% AOP but with significantly lower perceived exertion and discomfort.
Effect estimate: ηp2 = 0.51 (95% CI 0.14, 0.40)
Absolute Event Rate: 53.66% vs 39.68%
p-value: p=<0.001
Background Blood flow restriction training (BFRT) can induce significant muscle activation and metabolic stress at low loads. However, the acute physiological and perceptual responses to different arterial occlusion pressures (AOPs) remain unclear. This study aimed to examine the effects of varying AOP levels on muscle activation, blood lactate concentration, and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during low-load resistance exercise in healthy young males. Methods Sixteen healthy males (20.4 ± 1.5 years) participated in a single-group, repeated-measures study. Each performed barbell back squats (20% 1RM) under four AOP conditions: 0%, 60%, 70%, and 80% AOP. Muscle activation (%MVC), blood lactate concentrations, and RPE were assessed. One-way and two-way repeated-measures ANOVAs were used to analyze the outcomes across pressure and time conditions. Results Muscle activation increased significantly at 70% and 80% AOP compared to 0% and 60% (e.g., semitendinosus: F (3, 45) = 15.79, p 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.51, 95% CI 0.14, 0.40), with no difference between 70% and 80% AOP. Blood lactate concentrations increased significantly post-exercise under 70% and 80% AOP (F (3, 45) = 4.82, p = 0.005, ηp 2 = 0.24, 95% CI 0.03, 0.22), although the main effect of pressure was not significant across time points (F (3, 45) = 1.63, p = 0.192, ηp 2 = 0.08, 95% CI 0.01, 0.13). RPE increased progressively with pressure (F (1.80, 26.94) = 25.34, p 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.63, 95% CI 0.28, 0.66), and was highest at 80% AOP. Conclusion 70%–80% AOPs elicited greater acute neuromuscular and metabolic responses compared to lower pressures, with 70% AOP achieving similar physiological outcomes as 80% but with lower perceived exertion. These findings provide practical guidance for selecting relative occlusion pressures during BFRT. Further studies are warranted to explore long-term training adaptations at these pressures.
Zhu et al. (Wed,) conducted a other in Healthy (n=16). Blood flow restriction training vs. 0% and 60% arterial occlusion pressure was evaluated on Muscle activation (%MVC) of semitendinosus (ηp2 = 0.51, 95% CI 0.14, 0.40, p=<0.001). Blood flow restriction training at 70% and 80% arterial occlusion pressure significantly increased muscle activation compared to 0% and 60% pressures, with 70% achieving similar physiological outcomes as 80% but with lower perceived exertion.