The addition of blood flow restriction to resistance exercise in individuals with knee pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Strength and Functionality in People With Knee Arthropathies: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Previous meta-analyses show contrasting findings regarding the effects of blood flow restriction training (BFRT) in different knee conditions. Furthermore, no previous dose-response analysis has been conducted to determine the dose of BFRT required for maximal strength and functionality adaptations. Objective: To analyze the evidence on the effects of BFRT on strength and functionality in patients with knee osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis through a systematic review with dose-response meta-analysis. Methods: Included studies met the following criteria: participants with knee osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis; low-load resistance BFRT as intervention; control group with traditional moderate or high intensity resistance training (MIRT and HIRT); include muscle strength and functionality as primary and secondary outcome measures, respectively; and only randomized controlled trials. A random-effects and a dose-response model estimated strength and functionality using estimates of the total repetitions performed. Results: We included five studies with a sample of 205 participants. No statistically significant differences were found between BFRT and MIRT or HIRT for strength (SMD = -0.06; 95% CI = -0.78-0.67; and p > 0.05) and functionality (SMD = 0.07; 95% CI = -0.23-0.37; and p > 0.05). We found an inverted U-shaped association between the increase in total repetitions and strength gain and between the increase in total repetitions and functional improvement. Conclusions: People with knee osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis can use low-load BFRT for strength and functionality as a similarly effective alternative to MIRT and HIRT. A total of 2000 repetitions per BFRT program are necessary to maximize strength gains in these patients, while functional improvement requires 1800 total repetitions.

Acute and Chronic Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training in Physically Active Patients With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Muscle atrophy and loss of knee function are common findings after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Rehabilitation through blood flow restriction (BFR) has gained clinical relevance when combined with low loads to improve these disorders in recent years.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rehabilitation effectiveness of ACL reconstruction with the use of BFR on pain, functionality, strength, and muscle mass in physically active people.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed, Web of Science, and MEDLINE was performed on March 31, 2023, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials with active adults who underwent ACL surgery were included. They had to compare conventional treatments with the use of BFR, reporting values of pain, functionality, strength, or cross-sectional area (CSA). Articles whose participants presented concomitant injuries and whose intervention combined the use of BFR with treatments other than resistance training were excluded.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study design, population, cuff pressure, and main outcomes including strength, quadriceps CSA, pain, and functionality.

RESULTS

Six studies out of a total of 389 were included (152 participants; 90 men and 62 women). These included studies showed no differences on CSA or strength when comparing BFR training with high loads exercise. BFR has demonstrated improvements in knee functionality and pain compared with other interventions such as immobilization or high loads training.

CONCLUSION

The use of low loads combined with BFR improves pain, strength, functionality, and CSA. In addition, knee pain reduction and functionality are greater with BFR compared with the use of high loads or immobilization.

Effects of blood flow restriction therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis: protocol for an overview of systematic reviews

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common and prevalent musculoskeletal disease associated with population aging, negatively impacting function and quality of life. A consequence of knee OA is quadriceps muscle weakness. Musculoskeletal rehabilitation using low load exercises, associated with Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) may be a useful alternative to high load exercises when those cannot be tolerated. Several systematic reviews have reported inconclusive results due to discrepancies in study findings, heterogeneity of results, evaluated time points, and research questions explored.

Objective

To perform an overview of systematic reviews with meta-analyses, synthesizing the most recent evidence on the effects of muscle strength training with BFR for knee OA.

Methodology

Systematic reviews that include primary controlled and randomized clinical trials will be considered for inclusion. Articles will be considered only if they present a clear and reproducible methodological structure, and when they clearly demonstrate that a critical analysis of the evidence was carried out using instrumented analysis. Narrative reviews, other types of review, overviews of systematic reviews, and diagnostic, prognostic and economic evaluation studies will be excluded. Studies must include adults aged 40 years and older with a diagnosis of knee OA. Two authors will perform an electronic search with guidance from an experienced librarian. The following databases will be searched: PubMed via MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), PEDro, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) via EBSCO host, Web of Science, and the gray literature. The search strategy used in the databases will follow the acronym PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design). Screening (i.e., titles and abstracts) of studies identified by the search strategy will be selected using Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org). The quality assessment will be performed using the "Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR-2) tool.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, CRD42022367209.

Preferred Reporting Items for Resistance Exercise Studies (PRIRES): A Checklist Developed Using an Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

The issues of replication and scientific transparency have been raised in exercise and sports science research. A potential means to address the replication crisis and enhance research reliability is to improve reporting quality and transparency. This study aims to formulate a reporting checklist as a supplement to the existing reporting guidelines, specifically for resistance exercise studies.

METHODS

PubMed (which covers Medline) and Scopus (which covers Medline, EMBASE, Ei Compendex, World Textile Index, Fluidex, Geobase, Biobase, and most journals in Web of Science) were searched for systematic reviews that comprised the primary studies directly comparing different resistance training methods. Basic data on the selected reviews, including on authors, publication years, and objectives, were summarized. The reporting items for the checklist were identified based on the objective of the reviews. Additional items from an existing checklist, namely the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template, a National Strength and Conditioning Association handbook, and an article from the EQUATOR library were incorporated into the final reporting checklist.

RESULTS

Our database search retrieved 3595 relevant records. After automatic duplicate removal, the titles and abstracts of the remaining 2254 records were screened. The full texts of 137 records were then reviewed, and 88 systematic reviews that met the criteria were included in the umbrella review.

CONCLUSION

Developed primarily by an umbrella review method, this checklist covers the research questions which have been systematically studied and is expected to improve the reporting completeness of future resistance exercise studies. The PRIRES checklist comprises 26 reporting items (39 subitems) that cover four major topics in resistance exercise intervention: 1) exercise selection, performance, and training parameters, 2) training program and progression, 3) exercise setting, and 4) planned vs actual training. The PRIRES checklist was designed specifically for reporting resistance exercise intervention. It is expected to be used with other reporting guidelines such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials. This article presents only the development process and resulting items of the checklist. An accompanying article detailing the rationale for, the importance of, and examples of each item is being prepared.

REGISTRATION

This study is registered with the EQUATOR Network under the title "Preferred Reporting Items for Resistance Exercise Studies (PRIRES)." PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235259.

ADAPTations to low load blood flow restriction exercise versus conventional heavier load resistance exercise in UK military personnel with persistent knee pain: protocol for the ADAPT study, a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Muscle atrophy, muscle weakness and localised pain are commonly reported following musculoskeletal injury (MSKI). To mitigate this risk and prepare individuals to return to sport or physically demanding occupations, resistance training (RT) is considered a vital component of rehabilitation. However, to elicit adaptations in muscle strength, exercise guidelines recommend lifting loads ≥ 70% of an individual's one repetition maximum (1-RM). Unfortunately, individuals with persistent knee pain are often unable to tolerate such high loads and this may negatively impact the duration and extent of their recovery. Low load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) is an alternative RT technique that has demonstrated improvements in muscle strength, hypertrophy, and pain in the absence of high mechanical loading. However, the effectiveness of high-frequency LL-BFR in a residential rehabilitation environment remains unclear. This study will compare the efficacy of high frequency LL-BFR to 'conventional' heavier load resistance training (HL-RT) on measures of physical function and pain in adults with persistent knee pain.

METHODS

This is a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 150 UK service personnel (aged 18-55) admitted for a 3-week residential rehabilitation course with persistent knee pain. Participants will be randomised to receive: a) LL-BFR delivered twice daily at 20% 1-RM or b) HL-RT three-times per week at 70% 1-RM. Outcomes will be recorded at baseline (T1), course discharge (T2) and at three-months following course (T3). The primary outcome will be the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) at T2. Secondary outcomes will include patient reported perceptions of pain, physical and occupational function and objective measures of muscle strength and neuromuscular performance. Additional biomechanical and physiological mechanisms underpinning both RT interventions will also be investigated as part of a nested mechanistic study.

DISCUSSION

LL-BFR is a rehabilitation modality that has the potential to induce positive clinical adaptations in the absence of high mechanical loads and therefore could be considered a treatment option for patients suffering significant functional deficits who are unable to tolerate heavy load RT. Consequently, results from this study will have a direct clinical application to healthcare service providers and patients involved in the rehabilitation of physically active adults suffering MSKI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.org reference number, NCT05719922.

Low-Intensity Blood Flow Restriction Exercises Modulate Pain Sensitivity in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review

Low-intensity exercise with blood flow restriction (LIE-BFR) has been proposed as an effective intervention to induce hypoalgesia in both healthy individuals and patients with knee pain. Nevertheless, there is no systematic review reporting the effect of this method on pain threshold. We aimed to evaluate the following: (i) the effect of LIE-BFR on pain threshold compared to other interventions in patients or healthy individuals; and (ii) how different types of applications may influence hypoalgesic response. We included randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of LIE-BFR alone or as an additive intervention compared with controls or other interventions. Pain threshold was the outcome measure. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro score. Six studies with 189 healthy adults were included. Five studies were rated with 'moderate' and 'high' methodological quality. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity, quantitative synthesis could not be performed. All studies used pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) to assess pain sensitivity. LIE-BFR resulted in significant increases in PPTs compared to conventional exercise at local and remote sites 5 min post-intervention. Higher-pressure BFR results in greater exercise-induced hypoalgesia compared to lower pressure, while exercise to failure produces a similar reduction in pain sensitivity with or without BFR. Based on our findings, LIE-BFR can be an effective intervention to increase pain threshold; however, the effect depends on the exercise methodology. Further research is necessary to investigate the effectiveness of this method in reducing pain sensitivity in patients with pain symptomatology.

Wrist Extensor Training With Blood Flow Restriction for the Management of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Case Report

Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is a common overuse injury with complex underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Although several modes of exercise with or without passive interventions have been recommended as the first-line treatment option of the condition, their effectiveness remains inconclusive. The aim of this case report is to evaluate the effect of wrist extensor exercises with blood flow restriction (BFR) as an add-on intervention to a multi-modal physiotherapy programme to improve outcomes in a patient with LET. A 51-year-old male patient presented with a history of right LET for six months. Interventions included wrist extension exercise with BFR, a two-stage progressive loading training programme of the upper limb, soft-tissue massage, education and a home exercise programme for six weeks (12 visits). A substantial improvement in pain intensity, pain-free grip strength, Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation score and self-perceived recovery was reported at three-, six-, and 12-week follow-up measurements. A 21% reduction in pressure pain thresholds at the lateral epicondyle was found immediately after wrist extensor exercise with BFR. Based on our findings, adding wrist extensor exercises with BFR to a multimodal physiotherapy programme seems a promising approach to improve the treatment outcome in LET. Nonetheless, further research is needed to confirm the present results.

Effects of blood flow restriction on spine postural control using a robotic platform: A pilot randomized cross-over study

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training improves muscle strength and functional outcomes, but the proprioceptive implications of this technique in the rehabilitation field are still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed at assessing the effects of BFR in terms of stabilometric and balance performance.

METHODS

In this pilot randomized cross-over study, healthy young adults were included and randomly assigned to Groups A and B. Both groups underwent a postural assessment with and without wearing a BFR device. Study participants of Group A underwent postural baseline assessment wearing BFR and then removed BFR for further evaluations, whereas subjects in Group B performed the baseline assessment without BFR and then with BFR. Stabilometric and balance performance were assessed by the robotic platform Hunova, the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), the self-reported perceived balance (7-point Likert scale), and discomfort self-rated assessment. Moreover, the safety profile was recorded.

RESULTS

Fourteen subjects were included and randomly assigned to Group A (n: 7) and Group B (n: 7). Significant differences were shown in balance tests in static conditions performed on the Hunova robot platform in terms of average distance RMS (root-mean-square) with open eyes (OE), anteroposterior (AP) trunk oscillation range with OE, mediolateral (ML) average speed of oscillation with OE, and total excursion AP range with closed eyes (CE) (BFR: 3.44 ± 1.06; without BFR: 2.75 ± 0.72; p= 0.041). Moreover, elastic balance test showed differences in Romberg index (BFR: 0.16 ±0.16; without BFR: 0.09 ± 0.07; p= 0.047). No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, our data showed that BFR affects balance performance of healthy subjects. Further studies are needed to better characterize the possible role of BFR treatment in the context of a specific rehabilitation protocol.

Low-Load Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction Is Effective for Managing Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LLRT-BFR) when compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Forty-six patients with LET were randomly assigned to a LLRT-BFR or a LLRT with sham-BFR treatment group. All patients received soft tissue massage, supervised exercises with BFR or sham intervention (twice a week for 6 weeks), advice, and a home exercise program. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) score, pain-free grip strength, and global rating of change, measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Between-group differences were evaluated using mixed-effects models with participant-specific random effects for continuous data. Global rating of change was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Statistically significant between-group differences were found in favor of LLRT-BFR compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in pain intensity at 12-week follow-up (-1.54, 95% CI: -2.89 to -0.18; P = .026), pain-free grip strength ratio at 6-week follow-up (0.20, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.34; P = .005), and PRTEE at 6- and 12-week follow-up (-11.92, 95% CI: -20.26 to -3.59; P = .006, and -15.23, 95% CI: -23.57 to -6.9; P<.001, respectively). At 6- and 12-weeks, patients in the LLRT-BFR group had greater odds of reporting complete recovery or significant improvement (OR = 6.0, OR = 4.09, respectively). CONCLUSION: Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction produced significantly better results compared to the LLRT with sham-BFR for all primary outcomes. Considering the clinically significant between-group improvement in function (>11 points in PRTEE) and the better success rates in the LLRT-BFR group, this intervention may improve recovery in LET. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(12):803-825. Epub: 14 September 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11211.

Effect of Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Training After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background

Quadriceps strength and mass deficits are common after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Postoperatively, heavy load resistance training can have detrimental effects on knee joint pain and ACL graft laxity. Therefore, low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training has been suggested as an alternative to traditional strength rehabilitation.

Purpose

The present systematic review aimed to investigate the effect of LL-BFR training on quadriceps strength, quadriceps mass, knee joint pain, and ACL graft laxity after ACL reconstruction compared to non-BFR training.

Study design

Systematic review.

Methods

A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE.com, Cochrane Library/Wiley, CINAHL/Ebsco and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics was performed on 19 February 2021. Studies were included if they compared LL-BFR and non-BFR training after ACL reconstruction with pre- and post-intervention quadriceps strength, quadriceps mass, knee joint pain or ACL graft laxity measurement. Systematic reviews, editorials, case reports and studies not published in a scientific peer reviewed journal were excluded. The risk of bias of randomized studies was assessed with the use of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

Results

A total of six randomized controlled trials were included. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment was defined as high risk in two of the six studies. In all studies blinding of participants and personnel was unclear or could not be performed. The included studies used different LL-BFR and non-BFR protocols with heterogeneous outcome measurements. Therefore, a qualitative analysis was performed. Two of the six studies assessed quadriceps strength and demonstrated significant greater quadriceps strength after LL-BFR compared to non-BFR training. Quadriceps mass was evaluated in four studies. Two studies observed significant greater quadriceps mass after LL-BFR compared to non-BFR training, while two studies observed no significant difference in quadriceps mass. Knee joint pain was assessed in three studies with significantly less knee joint pain after LL-BFR compared to non-BFR training. Two studies evaluated ACL graft laxity and observed no significant difference in ACL graft laxity between LL-BFR and non-BFR training.

Conclusion

The results of this systematic review indicate that LL-BFR training after ACL reconstruction may be beneficial on quadriceps strength, quadriceps mass, and knee joint pain compared to non-BFR training with non-detrimental effects on ACL graft laxity. However, more randomized controlled trials with standardized intervention protocols and outcome measurements are needed to add evidence on the clinical value of LL-BFR training.

Level of evidence

2a.

Benefits and Mechanisms of Exercise Training for Knee Osteoarthritis

Knee osteoarthritis is a chronic degenerative disease. Cartilage and subchondral bone degeneration, as well as synovitis, are the main pathological changes associated with knee osteoarthritis. Mechanical overload, inflammation, metabolic factors, hormonal changes, and aging play a vital role in aggravating the progression of knee osteoarthritis. The main treatments for knee osteoarthritis include pharmacotherapy, physiotherapy, and surgery. However, pharmacotherapy has many side effects, and surgery is only suitable for patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Exercise training, as a complementary and adjunctive physiotherapy, can prevent cartilage degeneration, inhibit inflammation, and prevent loss of the subchondral bone and metaphyseal bone trabeculae. Increasing evidence indicates that exercise training can improve pain, stiffness, joint dysfunction, and muscle weakness in patients with knee osteoarthritis. There are several exercise trainings options for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, including aerobic exercise, strength training, neuromuscular exercise, balance training, proprioception training, aquatic exercise, and traditional exercise. For Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) experimental animals, those exercise trainings can reduce inflammation, delay cartilage and bone degeneration, change tendon, and muscle structure. In this review, we summarize the main symptoms of knee osteoarthritis, the mechanisms of exercise training, and the therapeutic effects of different exercise training methods on patients with knee osteoarthritis. We hope this review will allow patients in different situations to receive appropriate exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis, and provide a reference for further research and clinical application of exercise training for knee osteoarthritis.

Does blood flow restriction training enhance clinical outcomes in knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the efficacy of blood flow restriction training (BFRT) on individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Eight electronic databases were searched by one researcher.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing BFRT to regular resistance training (RT) for knee OA.

DATA SYNTHESIS

One reviewer selected the eligible RCTs and exported the data. Two reviewers evaluated study quality using the PEDro scale. We performed meta-analysis where appropriate using a random-effects model. We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE.

RESULTS

Five studies were eligible. The key outcomes analysed were pain, self-reported function, objective physical function, strength and muscle size. Across all comparisons, there was low to moderate quality evidence of no difference between BFRT and traditional RT.

CONCLUSION

The limited available evidence does not suggest that BFRT enhances outcomes for people with knee OA. These findings do not support clinicians using BFRT in people with knee OA. Instead, evidence-based messages regarding exercise and education should remain the mainstay of rehabilitation. Additional studies should clarify whether some people with knee OA who cannot complete an adequate exercise programme due to pain, might still benefit from BFRT to facilitate less painful exercise.

Comparison of Blood Flow Restriction Training versus Non-Occlusive Training in Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction or Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis (KOA) have been shown to have quadriceps muscle weakness and/or atrophy in common. The physiological mechanisms of blood flow restriction (BFR) training could facilitate muscle hypertrophy. The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate the effects of BFR training on quadriceps cross-sectional area (CSA), pain perception, function and quality of life on these patients compared to a non-BFR training. A literature research was performed using Web of Science, PEDro, Scopus, MEDLINE, Dialnet, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library databases. The main inclusion criteria were that papers were English or Spanish language reports of randomized controlled trials involving patients with ACL reconstruction or suffering from KOA. The initial research identified 159 publications from all databases; 10 articles were finally included. The search was conducted from April to June 2020. Four of these studies found a significant improvement in strength. A significant increase in CSA was found in two studies. Pain significantly improved in four studies and only one study showed a significant improvement in functionality/quality of life. Low-load training with BFR may be an effective option treatment for increasing quadriceps strength and CSA, but more research is needed.

Reply to letter to the Editor about the article "The addition of blood flow restriction to resistance exercise in individuals with knee pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis"

•The effect of resistance exercise with BRF is not more effective that resistance exercise in in patients with knee pain. •Our study was unable to demonstrate the clinical benefits of resistance exercise with BRF in subjects with knee pain. •Further studies are needed to support the clinical effect of BRF in pain intensity and knee function in these patients.