Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Purpose: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, blood flow restriction (BFR) with low-load resistance training (BFR-RT) was compared with high-load resistance training (HL-RT) on muscle strength in healthy adults. The characteristics of cuff pressure suitable for muscle strength gain were also...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-08-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Physiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2023.1244292/full |
| _version_ | 1797737029333680128 |
|---|---|
| author | Hualong Chang Jing Yan Guiwei Lu Biao Chen Jianli Zhang |
| author_facet | Hualong Chang Jing Yan Guiwei Lu Biao Chen Jianli Zhang |
| author_sort | Hualong Chang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, blood flow restriction (BFR) with low-load resistance training (BFR-RT) was compared with high-load resistance training (HL-RT) on muscle strength in healthy adults. The characteristics of cuff pressure suitable for muscle strength gain were also investigated by analyzing the effects of applying different occlusion pressure prescriptions and cuff inflation patterns on muscle strength gain.Methods: Literature search was conducted using PubMed, Ovid Medline, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify literature published until May 2023. Studies reporting the effects of BFR-RT interventions on muscle strength gain were compared with those of HL-RT. The risk of bias in the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane tool, followed by a meta-analysis to calculate the combined effect. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore the beneficial variables.Results: Nineteen articles (42 outcomes), with a total of 458 healthy adults, were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect showed higher muscle strength gain with HL-RT than with BFR-RT (p = 0.03, SMD = −0.16, 95% CI: −0.30 to −0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the BFR-RT applied with incremental and individualized pressure achieved muscle strength gain similar to the HL-RT (p = 0.8, SMD = −0.05, 95% CI: −0.44 to 0.34; p = 0.68, SMD = −0.04, 95% CI: −0.23 to 0.15), but muscle strength gain obtained via BFR-RT applied with absolute pressure was lower than that of HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = −0.45, 95% CI: −0.71 to −0.19). Furthermore, muscle strength gain obtained by BFR-RT applied with intermittent pressure was similar to that obtained by HL-RT (p = 0.88, SMD = −0.02, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.23), but muscle strength gain for BFR-RT applied with continuous pressure showed a less prominent increase than that for HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = −0.3, 95% CI: −0.48 to −0.11).Conclusion: In general, HL-RT produces superior muscle strength gains than BFR-RT. However, the application of individualized, incremental, and intermittent pressure exercise protocols in BFR-RT elicits comparable muscle strength gains to HL-RT. Our findings indicate that cuff pressure characteristics play a significant role in establishing a BFR-RT intervention program for enhancing muscle strength in healthy adults.Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails; Identifier: PROSPERO (CRD42022364934). |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T13:22:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8d16c3dc1e7c47e882f5cf42e1d470fb |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-042X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T13:22:28Z |
| publishDate | 2023-08-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Physiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-8d16c3dc1e7c47e882f5cf42e1d470fb2023-08-25T18:16:01ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Physiology1664-042X2023-08-011410.3389/fphys.2023.12442921244292Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysisHualong Chang0Jing Yan1Guiwei Lu2Biao Chen3Jianli Zhang4College of Physical Education and Health Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, ChinaCollege of Education, Anyang Normal University, Anyang, ChinaCollege of Physical Education and Health Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, ChinaCollege of Physical Education and Health Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, ChinaExercise and Metabolism Research Center, College of Physical Education and Health Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, ChinaPurpose: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, blood flow restriction (BFR) with low-load resistance training (BFR-RT) was compared with high-load resistance training (HL-RT) on muscle strength in healthy adults. The characteristics of cuff pressure suitable for muscle strength gain were also investigated by analyzing the effects of applying different occlusion pressure prescriptions and cuff inflation patterns on muscle strength gain.Methods: Literature search was conducted using PubMed, Ovid Medline, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify literature published until May 2023. Studies reporting the effects of BFR-RT interventions on muscle strength gain were compared with those of HL-RT. The risk of bias in the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane tool, followed by a meta-analysis to calculate the combined effect. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore the beneficial variables.Results: Nineteen articles (42 outcomes), with a total of 458 healthy adults, were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect showed higher muscle strength gain with HL-RT than with BFR-RT (p = 0.03, SMD = −0.16, 95% CI: −0.30 to −0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the BFR-RT applied with incremental and individualized pressure achieved muscle strength gain similar to the HL-RT (p = 0.8, SMD = −0.05, 95% CI: −0.44 to 0.34; p = 0.68, SMD = −0.04, 95% CI: −0.23 to 0.15), but muscle strength gain obtained via BFR-RT applied with absolute pressure was lower than that of HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = −0.45, 95% CI: −0.71 to −0.19). Furthermore, muscle strength gain obtained by BFR-RT applied with intermittent pressure was similar to that obtained by HL-RT (p = 0.88, SMD = −0.02, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.23), but muscle strength gain for BFR-RT applied with continuous pressure showed a less prominent increase than that for HL-RT (p < 0.05, SMD = −0.3, 95% CI: −0.48 to −0.11).Conclusion: In general, HL-RT produces superior muscle strength gains than BFR-RT. However, the application of individualized, incremental, and intermittent pressure exercise protocols in BFR-RT elicits comparable muscle strength gains to HL-RT. Our findings indicate that cuff pressure characteristics play a significant role in establishing a BFR-RT intervention program for enhancing muscle strength in healthy adults.Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails; Identifier: PROSPERO (CRD42022364934).https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2023.1244292/fullblood flow restrictionmuscle strengthocclusion pressure prescriptionscuff inflation patternsadult |
| spellingShingle | Hualong Chang Jing Yan Guiwei Lu Biao Chen Jianli Zhang Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis Frontiers in Physiology blood flow restriction muscle strength occlusion pressure prescriptions cuff inflation patterns adult |
| title | Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full | Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_short | Muscle strength adaptation between high-load resistance training versus low-load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_sort | muscle strength adaptation between high load resistance training versus low load blood flow restriction training with different cuff pressure characteristics a systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | blood flow restriction muscle strength occlusion pressure prescriptions cuff inflation patterns adult |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2023.1244292/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hualongchang musclestrengthadaptationbetweenhighloadresistancetrainingversuslowloadbloodflowrestrictiontrainingwithdifferentcuffpressurecharacteristicsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jingyan musclestrengthadaptationbetweenhighloadresistancetrainingversuslowloadbloodflowrestrictiontrainingwithdifferentcuffpressurecharacteristicsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT guiweilu musclestrengthadaptationbetweenhighloadresistancetrainingversuslowloadbloodflowrestrictiontrainingwithdifferentcuffpressurecharacteristicsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT biaochen musclestrengthadaptationbetweenhighloadresistancetrainingversuslowloadbloodflowrestrictiontrainingwithdifferentcuffpressurecharacteristicsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jianlizhang musclestrengthadaptationbetweenhighloadresistancetrainingversuslowloadbloodflowrestrictiontrainingwithdifferentcuffpressurecharacteristicsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |