Key result
An inflatable stress ball elicited similar cardiovascular and psychophysical responses (average RPE 5-6) compared to a traditional computerized device during isometric handgrip training.
Why the study?
The WHO emphasizes the need for cost-effective alternatives to lower blood pressure, prompting evaluation of an affordable inflatable stress ball compared to a traditional computerized device for isometric handgrip training.
Does an inflatable stress ball produce similar BP, HR, and RPE responses compared to a traditional computerized device during isometric handgrip training in healthy adults?
Does an inflatable stress ball produce similar BP, HR, and RPE responses compared to a traditional computerized device during isometric handgrip training in healthy adults?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
An affordable inflatable stress ball produces similar cardiovascular and psychophysical responses to a traditional computerized device for isometric handgrip training, offering a cost-effective alternative for blood pressure management.
OBJECTIVES: The World Health Organization emphasises the need for cost-effective alternative methods to lower blood pressure (BP). Endorsed nationally in HTN guidelines, isometric handgrip (IHG) training is an alternative method of BP control. The purpose of this study was to compare the BP, heart rate (HR) and rates of perceived exertion (RPE) responses between a bout of IHG training performed using the traditional computerized device and a more affordable, inflatable stress ball. METHODS: Twenty healthy adults performed one bout (4, 2-min isometric contractions, with 1-min rests between each contraction at 30% maximal voluntary contraction) of IHG training using the traditional computerized device, and one bout with the inflatable stress ball. BP, HR, and RPE were recorded. However, average RPE for both devices ranged between 5 and 6 indicating that participants were rating 30% of their MVC, consistent with previous work. DISCUSSION: The similar cardiovascular and psychophysical responses provide support for the potential use of this low individual- and provider-burden, cost-efficient IHG device, and lay the foundation for a future training study to test the hypothesis of benefit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richards et al. (2021) studied Healthy adults (n=20). Inflatable stress ball vs. Traditional computerized device was evaluated on Blood pressure, heart rate, and rates of perceived exertion (RPE) responses (p=< 0.05). An inflatable stress ball elicited similar cardiovascular and psychophysical responses (average RPE 5-6) compared to a traditional computerized device during isometric handgrip training.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: