Key result
Passive movement combined with blood flow restriction did not augment acute muscular responses, such as deoxygenation (ΔμM 10.3 vs 10.3), compared to blood flow restriction alone.
Why the study?
To compare the acute effects of passive movement combined with blood flow restriction to passive movement or blood flow restriction alone.
Does passive movement combined with blood flow restriction augment acute muscular responses compared to blood flow restriction alone in healthy participants?
RCT (n=20)
randomized
Does passive movement combined with blood flow restriction augment acute muscular responses compared to blood flow restriction alone in healthy participants?
Absolute Event Rate: 10.3% vs 10.3%
Combining passive movement with blood flow restriction does not augment acute muscular responses compared to blood flow restriction alone in healthy participants.
Passive movement adds no acute benefit to BFR alone; confirms BFR drives responses without synergistic augmentation.
Purpose To compare the acute effects of passive movement combined with blood flow restriction (PM + BFR) to passive movement (PM) or blood flow restriction alone (BFR). Methods A total of 20 healthy participants completed: time control (TC), PM, BFR and PM + BFR (one per leg, over 2 days; randomized). For PM, a dynamometer moved the leg through 3 sets of 15 knee extensions/flexions (90° at 45°/second). For BFR, a cuff was inflated to 80% arterial occlusion pressure on the upper leg. Measurements consisted of anterior muscle thickness at 60% and 70% of the upper leg before and after (−0, −5 and −10 min) conditions, ratings of perceived effort and discomfort before conditions and after each set, and of the vastus lateralis during conditions. Data, presented as mean (SD), were compared using Bayesian RMANOVA, except for perceived effort and discomfort, which were compared using a Friedman's test (non‐parametric). Results 60% (Δcm before‐after‐0: TC = 0.04 [0.09], PM = −0.01 [0.15], BFR = 0.00 [0.11], PM + BFR = 0.01 [0.22]) and 70% (Δcm before‐after‐0: TC = 0.01 [0.09], PM = −0.01 [0.15], BFR = 0.02 [0.11], PM + BFR = −0.03 [0.22]) muscle thickness did not change. Perceived effort was greater than TC following PM (p = .05) and PM + BFR (p = .001). Perceived discomfort was greater following BFR and PM + BFR compared to TC (all p ≤ .002) and PM (all p ≤ .010). Changes in deoxygenation (e.g. channel 1; ΔμM start set 1‐end set 3: TC = 0.9 [1.2], PM = −1.2 [1.9], BFR = 10.3 [2.7], PM + BFR = 10.3 [3.0]) were generally greater with BFR and PM + BFR (BFinclusion = 1.210e + 13). Conclusion Acute muscular responses to PM + BFR are not augmented over the effect of BFR alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Healthy (n=20). Passive movement combined with blood flow restriction (PM + BFR) vs. Time control (TC), passive movement (PM), and blood flow restriction alone (BFR) was evaluated on Anterior muscle thickness and deoxygenation. Passive movement combined with blood flow restriction did not augment acute muscular responses, such as deoxygenation (ΔμM 10.3 vs 10.3), compared to blood flow restriction alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: