Validity of the Handheld Doppler to Determine Lower-Limb Blood Flow Restriction Pressure for Exercise Protocols

Measurements of Arterial Occlusion Pressure Using Hand-Held Devices

ABSTRACT

Vehrs, PR, Reynolds, S, Allen, J, Barrett, R, Blazzard, C, Burbank, T, Hart, H, Kasper, N, Lacey, R, Lopez, D, and Fellingham, GW. Measurements of arterial occlusion pressure using hand-held devices. J Strength Cond Res 38(5): 873-880, 2024-Arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) of the brachial artery was measured simultaneously using Doppler ultrasound (US), a hand-held Doppler (HHDOP), and a pulse oximeter (PO) in the dominant (DOM) and nondominant (NDOM) arms of males ( n = 21) and females ( n = 23) using continuous (CONT) and incremental (INCR) cuff inflation protocols. A mixed-model analysis of variance revealed significant ( p < 0.05) overall main effects between AOP measured using a CONT (115.7 ± 10.9) or INCR (115.0 ± 11.5) cuff inflation protocol; between AOP measured using US (116.3 ± 11.2), HHDOP (115.4 ± 11.2), and PO (114.4 ± 11.2); and between males (120.7 ± 10.6) and females (110.5 ± 9.4). The small overall difference (1.81 ± 3.3) between US and PO measures of AOP was significant ( p < 0.05), but the differences between US and HHDOP and between HHDOP and PO measures of AOP were not significant. There were no overall differences in AOP between the DOM and NDOM arms. Trial-to-trial variance in US measurements of AOP was not significant when using either cuff inflation protocol but was significant when using HHDOP and PO and a CONT cuff inflation protocol. Bland-Altman plots revealed reasonable limits of agreement for both HHDOP and PO measures of AOP. The small differences in US, HHDOP, and PO measurements of AOP when using CONT or INCR cuff inflation protocols are of minimal practical importance. The choice of cuff inflation protocol is one of personal preference. Hand-held Doppler of PO can be used to assess AOP before using blood flow restriction during exercise.

Low-intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction for patients with claudication: A randomized controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Claudication is a common and debilitating symptom of peripheral artery disease, resulting in poor exercise performance and quality of life (QoL). Supervised exercise programs are an effective rehabilitation for patients with claudication, but they are poorly adhered to, in part due to the high pain and effort associated with walking, aerobic, and resistance exercise. Low-intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) represents an alternative exercise method for individuals who are intolerant to high-intensity protocols. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a supervised BFR program in patients with claudication.

METHODS

Thirty patients with stable claudication completed an 8-week supervised exercise program and were randomized to either BFR (n = 15) or a control of matched exercise without BFR (control; n = 15). Feasibility, safety, and efficacy were assessed.

RESULTS

All success criteria of the feasibility trial were met. Exercise adherence was high (BFR = 78.3%, control = 83.8%), loss to follow up was 10%, and there were no adverse events. Clinical improvement in walking was achieved in 86% of patients in the BFR group but in only 46% of patients in the control group. Time to claudication pain during walking increased by 35% for BFR but was unchanged for the control. QoL for the BFR group showed improved mobility, ability to do usual activities, pain, depression, and overall health at follow up.

CONCLUSION

A supervised blood flow restriction program is feasible in patients with claudication and has the potential to increase exercise performance, reduce pain, and improve QoL. (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04890275).

Use of a handheld Doppler to measure brachial and femoral artery occlusion pressure

Objective: Measurement of arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) is essential to the safe and effective use of blood flow restriction during exercise. Use of a Doppler ultrasound (US) is the "gold standard" method to measure AOP. Validation of a handheld Doppler (HHDOP) device to measure AOP could make the measurement of AOP more accessible to practitioners in the field. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of AOP measurements of the brachial and femoral arteries using an HHDOP. Methods: We simultaneously measured AOP using a "gold standard" US and a HHDOP in the dominant and non-dominant arms (15 males; 15 females) and legs (15 males; 15 females). Results: There were no differences in limb circumference or limb volume in the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs between males and females or between the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs of males and females. The differences between US and HHDOP measures of AOP in the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs were either not significant or small (<10 mmHg) and of little practical importance. There were no sex differences in AOP measurements of the femoral artery (p > 0.60). Bland-Altman analysis yielded an average bias (-0.65 mmHg; -2.93 mmHg) and reasonable limits of agreement (±5.56 mmHg; ±5.58 mmHg) between US and HHDOP measures of brachial and femoral artery AOP, respectively. Conclusion: HHDOP yielded acceptable measures of AOP of the brachial and femoral arteries and can be used to measure AOP by practitioners for the safe and effective use of blood flow restriction. Due to the potential differences in AOP between dominant and non-dominant limbs, AOP should be measured in each limb.

Comparative Perceptual, Affective, and Cardiovascular Responses between Resistance Exercise with and without Blood Flow Restriction in Older Adults

Older adults and patients with chronic disease presenting with muscle weakness or musculoskeletal disorders may benefit from low-load resistance exercise (LLRE) with blood flow restriction (BFR). LLRE-BFR has been shown to increase muscle size, strength, and endurance comparable to traditional resistance exercise but without the use of heavy loads. However, potential negative effects from LLRE-BFR present as a barrier to participation and limit its wider use. This study examined the perceptual, affective, and cardiovascular responses to a bout of LLRE-BFR and compared the responses to LLRE and moderate-load resistance exercise (MLRE). Twenty older adults (64.3 ± 4.2 years) performed LLRE-BFR, LLRE and MLRE consisting of 4 sets of leg press and knee extension, in a randomised crossover design. LLRE-BFR was more demanding than LLRE and MLRE through increased pain (p ≤ 0.024, d = 0.8-1.4) and reduced affect (p ≤ 0.048, d = -0.5--0.9). Despite this, LLRE-BFR was enjoyed and promoted a positive affective response (p ≤ 0.035, d = 0.5-0.9) following exercise comparable to MLRE. This study supports the use of LLRE-BFR for older adults and encourages future research to examine the safety, acceptability, and efficacy of LLRE-BFR in patients with chronic disease.

The Impacts of Combined Blood Flow Restriction Training and Betaine Supplementation on One-Leg Press Muscular Endurance, Exercise-Associated Lactate Concentrations, Serum Metabolic Biomarkers, and Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1α Gene Expression

The purpose of this investigation was to compare the impacts of a potential blood flow restriction (BFR)-betaine synergy on one-leg press performance, lactate concentrations, and exercise-associated biomarkers. Eighteen recreationally trained males (25 ± 5 y) were randomized to supplement 6 g/day of either betaine anhydrous (BET) or cellulose placebo (PLA) for 14 days. Subsequently, subjects performed four standardized sets of one-leg press and two additional sets to muscular failure on both legs (BFR [LL-BFR; 20% 1RM at 80% arterial occlusion pressure] and high-load [HL; 70% 1RM]). Toe-tip lactate concentrations were sampled before (PRE), as well as immediately (POST0), 30 min (POST30M), and 3 h (POST3H) post-exercise. Serum homocysteine (HCY), growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 concentrations were additionally assessed at PRE and POST30M. Analysis failed to detect any significant between-supplement differences for total repetitions completed. Baseline lactate changes (∆) were significantly elevated from POST0 to POST30 and from POST30 to POST3H (p < 0.05), whereby HL additionally demonstrated significantly higher ∆Lactate versus LL-BFR (p < 0.001) at POST3H. Although serum ∆GH was not significantly impacted by supplement or condition, serum ∆IGF-1 was significantly (p = 0.042) higher in BET versus PLA and serum ∆HCY was greater in HL relative to LL-BFR (p = 0.044). Although these data fail to support a BFR-betaine synergy, they otherwise support betaine’s anabolic potential.

Blood Flow Restriction Therapy: An Evidence-Based Approach to Postoperative Rehabilitation

➢

Blood flow restriction therapy (BFRT) involves the application of a pneumatic tourniquet cuff to the proximal portion of the arm or leg. This restricts arterial blood flow while occluding venous return, which creates a hypoxic environment that induces many physiologic adaptations.

➢

BFRT is especially useful in postoperative rehabilitation because it produces muscular hypertrophy and strength gains without the need for heavy-load exercises that are contraindicated after surgery.

➢

Low-load resistance training with BFRT may be preferable to low-load or high-load training alone because it leads to comparable increases in strength and hypertrophy, without inducing muscular edema or increasing pain.

An Automated Technique for the Measurement of Limb Occlusion Pressure During Blood Flow Restriction Therapy Is Equivalent to Previous Gold Standard

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

The Evolution of Blood Flow Restricted Exercise

The use of blood flow restricted (BFR) exercise has become an accepted alternative approach to improve skeletal muscle mass and function and improve cardiovascular function in individuals that are not able to or do not wish to use traditional exercise protocols that rely on heavy loads and high training volumes. BFR exercise involves the reduction of blood flow to working skeletal muscle by applying a flexible cuff to the most proximal portions of a person’s arms or legs that results in decreased arterial flow to the exercising muscle and occluded venous return back to the central circulation. Safety concerns, especially related to the cardiovascular system, have not been consistently reported with a few exceptions; however, most researchers agree that BFR exercise can be a relatively safe technique for most people that are free from serious cardiovascular disease, as well as those with coronary artery disease, and also for people suffering from chronic conditions, such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, and osteoarthritis. Potential mechanisms to explain the benefits of BFR exercise are still mostly speculative and may require more invasive studies or the use of animal models to fully explore mechanisms of adaptation. The setting of absolute resistive pressures has evolved, from being based on an individual’s systolic blood pressure to a relative measure that is based on various percentages of the pressures needed to totally occlude blood flow in the exercising limb. However, since several other issues remain unresolved, such as the actual external loads used in combination with BFR, the type of cuff used to induce the blood flow restriction, and whether the restriction is continuous or intermittent, this paper will attempt to address these additional concerns.

The Effect of Lower-Body Blood Flow Restriction on Static and Perturbated Stable Stand in Young, Healthy Adults

Muscular fatigue can affect postural control processes by impacting on the neuromuscular and somatosensory system. It is assumed that this leads to an increased risk of injury, especially in sports such as alpine skiing that expose the body to strong and rapidly changing external forces. In this context, posture constraints and contraction-related muscular pressure may lead to muscular deoxygenation. This study investigates whether these constraints and pressure affect static and dynamic postural control. To simulate impaired blood flow in sports within a laboratory task, oxygen saturation was manipulated locally by using an inflatable cuff to induce blood flow restriction (BFR). Twenty-three subjects were asked to stand on a perturbatable platform used to assess postural-related movements. Using a 2 × 2 within-subject design, each participant performed postural control tasks both with and without BFR. BFR resulted in lower oxygenation of the m. quadriceps femoris (p = 0.024) and was associated with a significantly lower time to exhaustion (TTE) compared to the non-restricted condition [F_(1,19) = 16.22, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.46]. Perturbation resulted in a significantly increased TTE [F_(1,19) = 7.28, p = 0.014, η_p² = 0.277]. There were no significant effects on static and dynamic postural control within the saturation conditions. The present data indicate that BFR conditions leads to deoxygenation and a reduced TTE. Postural control and the ability to regain stability after perturbation were not affected within this investigation.

Current Techniques Used for Practical Blood Flow Restriction Training: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Bielitzki, R, Behrendt, T, Behrens, M, and Schega, L. Current techniques used for practical blood flow restriction training: a systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 35(10): 2936-2951, 2021-The purpose of this article was to systematically review the available scientific evidence on current methods used for practical blood flow restriction (pBFR) training together with application characteristics as well as advantages and disadvantages of each technique. A literature search was conducted in different databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) for the period from January 2000 to December 2020. Inclusion criteria for this review were (a) original research involving humans, (b) the use of elastic wraps or nonpneumatic cuffs, and (c) articles written in English. Of 26 studies included and reviewed, 15 were conducted using an acute intervention (11 in the lower body and 4 in the upper body), and 11 were performed with a chronic intervention (8 in the lower body, 1 in the upper body, and 2 in both the upper and the lower body). Three pBFR techniques could be identified: (a) based on the perceptual response (perceived pressure technique), (b) based on the overlap of the cuff (absolute and relative overlap technique), and (c) based on the cuffs' maximal tensile strength (maximal cuff elasticity technique). In conclusion, the perceived pressure technique is simple, valid for the first application, and can be used independently of the cuffs' material properties, but is less reliable within a person over time. The absolute and relative overlap technique as well as the maximal cuff elasticity technique might be applied more reliably due to markings, but require a cuff with constant material properties over time.

The Effect of Body Position and the Reliability of Upper Limb Arterial Occlusion Pressure Using a Handheld Doppler Ultrasound for Blood Flow Restriction Training

BACKGROUND

The precise calculation of arterial occlusive pressure is essential to accurately prescribe individualized pressures during blood flow restriction training. Arterial occlusion pressure in the lower limb varies significantly between different body positions while similar reports for the upper limb are lacking.

HYPOTHESIS

Body position has a significant effect in upper limb arterial occlusive pressure. Using cuffs with manual pump and a handheld Doppler ultrasound can be a reliable method to determine upper limb arterial blood flow restriction.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized repeated measures design.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

METHODS

Forty-two healthy participants (age mean ± SD = 28.1 ± 7.7 years) completed measurements in supine, seated, and standing position by 3 blinded raters. A cuff with a manual pump and a handheld acoustic ultrasound were used. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction was used to analyze differences between body positions. A within-subject coefficient of variation and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) test were used to calculate reproducibility and reliability, respectively.

RESULTS

A significantly higher upper limb arterial occlusive pressure was found in seated compared with supine position (P < 0.031) and in supine compared with standing position (P < 0.031) in all raters. An ICC of 0.894 (95% CI = 0.824-0.939, P < 0.001) was found in supine, 0.973 (95% CI = 0.955-0.985, P < 0.001) in seated, and 0.984 (95% CI = 0.973-0.991, P < 0.001) in standing position. ICC for test-retest reliability was found 0.90 (95% CI = 0.814-0.946, P < 0.001), 0.873 (95% CI = 0.762-0.93, P < 0.001), and 0.858 (95% CI = 0.737-0.923, P < 0.001) in the supine, seated, and standing position, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Upper limb arterial occlusive pressure was significantly dependent on body position. The method showed excellent interrater reliability and repeatability between different days.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Prescription of individualized pressures during blood flow restriction training requires measurement of upper limb arterial occlusive pressure in the appropriate position. The use of occlusion cuffs with a manual pump and a handheld Doppler ultrasound showed excellent reliability; however, the increased measurement error compared with the differences in arterial occlusive pressure between certain positions should be carefully considered for the clinical application of the method.

STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATIONS TAXONOMY (SORT)

B.

Comparison of skeletal muscle ultrastructural changes between normal and blood flow-restricted resistance exercise: A case report

NEW FINDINGS

What is the main observation in this case? The main observation of this case report is that blood flow-restricted exercise can cause myofibrils to have an aberrant wave-like appearance that is accompanied by irregular pockets of sarcoplasm in the intermyofibrillar space, while traditional forms of damage to the Z-discs and contractile elements are not as apparent. What insights does it reveal? Our findings indicate that blood flow restriction-mediated fluid pooling might cause alterations in skeletal muscle ultrastructure after exercise that might be directly related to myofibre swelling.

ABSTRACT

The acute effects of blood flow-restricted (BFR) exercise training on skeletal muscle ultrastructure are poorly understood owing to inconsistent findings and the use of largely imprecise systemic markers for indications of muscle damage. The purpose of this study was to compare myofibrillar ultrastructure before and 30 min after normal and BFR resistance exercise using transmission electron microscopy in a single individual to evaluate the feasibility of this more nuanced approach. One apparently healthy male with 13 years of resistance exercise completed six sets of both BFR [30% of one-repetition maximum (1-RM)] and normal non-occluded (70% of 1-RM) unilateral angled leg press on the contralateral leg, as a control, after assessment of 1-RM 72 h before. Vastus lateralis muscle biopsies were collected before and 30 min after each exercise session. The lengths and widths of 250 sarcomeres and the sarcoplasmic area were assessed via 20 individual transmission electron photomicrographs. Analysis revealed that BFR training (1.769 ± 0.12 μm) increased sarcomere length when compared with normal exercise (1.64 ± 0.17 μm; P < 0.001), without differences in sarcomere width between conditions (BFR, 0.90 ± 0.26 μm; normal, 0.93 ± 0.27 μm; P = 0.172). Furthermore, there were no significant interaction (P = 0.168) or condition effects between BFR (25.98 ± 4.17%) and normal (27.3 ± 6.49%) resistance exercise for sarcoplasmic area (P = 0.229). Exercise also increased sarcoplasmic area within the myofibril (pre-exercise, 24.42 ± 5.13%; postexercise, 28.95 ± 5.92%) for both conditions (P = 0.001). This case study demonstrates a unique BFR training-induced alteration in myofibril ultrastructure that appeared wave like and was accompanied by intracellular abnormalities that appeared to be fluid pockets of sarcoplasm disrupting the surrounding myofibrils.

Perceived Barriers to Blood Flow Restriction Training

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training is increasing in popularity in the fitness and rehabilitation settings due to its role in optimizing muscle mass and strength as well as cardiovascular capacity, function, and a host of other benefits. However, despite the interest in this area of research, there are likely some perceived barriers that practitioners must overcome to effectively implement this modality into practice. These barriers include determining BFR training pressures, access to appropriate BFR training technologies for relevant demographics based on the current evidence, a comprehensive and systematic approach to medical screening for safe practice and strategies to mitigate excessive perceptual demands of BFR training to foster long-term compliance. This manuscript attempts to discuss each of these barriers and provides evidence-based strategies and direction to guide clinical practice and future research.

Blood Flow Restriction Training: To Adjust or Not Adjust the Cuff Pressure Over an Intervention Period?

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training combines exercise and partial reduction of muscular blood flow using a pressured cuff. BFR training has been used to increase strength and muscle mass in healthy and clinical populations. A major methodological concern of BFR training is blood flow restriction pressure (BFRP) delivered during an exercise bout. Although some studies increase BFRP throughout a training intervention, it is unclear whether BFRP adjustments are pivotal to maintain an adequate BFR during a training period. While neuromuscular adaptations induced by BFR are widely studied, cardiovascular changes throughout training intervention with BFR and their possible relationship with BFRP are less understood. This study aimed to discuss the need for BFRP adjustment based on cardiovascular outcomes and provide directions for future researches. We conducted a literature review and analyzed 29 studies investigating cardiovascular adaptations following BFR training. Participants in the studies were healthy, middle-aged adults, older adults and clinical patients. Cuff pressure, when adjusted, was increased during the training period. However, cardiovascular outcomes did not provide a plausible rationale for cuff pressure increase. In contrast, avoiding increments in cuff pressure may minimize discomfort, pain and risks associated with BFR interventions, particularly in clinical populations. Given that cardiovascular adaptations induced by BFR training are conflicting, it is challenging to indicate whether increases or decreases in BFRP are needed. Based on the available evidence, we suggest that future studies investigate if maintaining or decreasing cuff pressure makes BFR training safer and/or more comfortable with similar physiological adaptation.

Current Clinical Concepts: Blood Flow Restriction Training

Muscle weakness and atrophy are common impairments following musculoskeletal injury. The use of blood flow restriction (BFR) training offers the ability to mitigate weakness and atrophy without overloading healing tissues. This approach requires consideration of a wide range of parameters and the purpose of this manuscript is to provide insights into proposed mechanisms of effectiveness, safety considerations, application guidelines, and clinical guidelines for BFR training following musculoskeletal injury. BFR training appears to be a safe and effective approach to therapeutic exercise in sports medicine environments. While training with higher loads produces the most substantial increases in strength and hypertrophy, BFR training appears to be a reasonable option to bridge between earlier phases of rehabilitation when higher loads may not be tolerated by the patient and later stages that are consistent with return to sport performance.

THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE HANDHELD OXIMETER TO DETERMINE LIMB OCCLUSION PRESSURE FOR BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION EXERCISE IN THE LOWER EXTREMITY

Background

The limb occlusion pressure (LOP) is determined to calculate the relative LOP. The different levels of relative LOP (percentage of LOP) influence the treatment effect and perceived discomfort during low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) strength training. Thus, determining the LOP is of the utmost importance when using BFR in clinical practice.

Purpose

The objective of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity and intra-rater (test-retest), intra-day reliability of an inexpensive, portable, easy-to-use handheld (HH) oximeter compared to a high-resolution Doppler ultrasound scanner in detecting LOP in the lower extremity.

Study design

Cross-sectional validity and reliability study.

Methods

Two raters who were blinded from each other simultaneously assessed 50 healthy participants (mean age of 25.8 years). A 20 cm-wide thigh cuff with an attached sphygmomanometer was inflated until the raters independently registered the LOP with the HH oximeter and the Doppler ultrasound scanner. The test session was repeated once after a five-minute time interval.

Results

The HH oximeter recorded a non-significantly higher LOP than the Doppler ultrasound scanner, with a mean difference of 6.3 mmHg in the test session (95% limits of agreement (LoA): -16.2 to 28.8, p = 0.13) and 5.4 mmHg in the retest session (95% LoA: -13.3 to 24.0, p = 0.10). The intra-rater reliability for both devices was moderate (ICC = 0.72-0.79). The measured LOP was significantly lower (p < 0.005) in the retest session than in the test session for both the HH oximeter (mean difference: -5.7 mmHg) and the Doppler ultrasound scanner (mean difference: -4.8 mmHg).

Conclusions

The HH oximeter is a valid and reliable measuring device for determining the LOP in the lower extremity in healthy adults. The authors recommend performing at least two LOP measurements with a one-minute rest interval.

Level of Evidence

2, Validity and reliability study.

[Blood flow restriction training for people with cardiovascular disease: An exploratory review]

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the evidence on the effects of blood flow restriction training in people with cardiovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, LILACS, SCOPUS and Wiley databases. Experimental and non-experimental studies investigating the effects of blood flow restriction in participants with cardiovascular disease were included.

RESULTS

Six clinical trials and three non-experimental studies met the inclusion criteria. The experimental studies were conducted in participants with hypertension and ischaemic heart disease. Non-experimental studies described hemodynamic adaptations and potential adverse effects of therapy. The risk of bias of the included clinical trials was moderate to high. Exercise-induced hemodynamic stress increased significantly during training with blood flow restriction compared with traditional training. The small number of available studies have focused mostly on acute effects, but chronic effects are unknown.

CONCLUSION

There is currently no evidence to recommend the use of blood flow restriction in people with cardiovascular disease.

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

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction (BFR) is an effective clinical intervention used to increase strength in healthy individuals. However, its effects on pain and function in individuals with knee pain are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of adding BFR to resistance exercise for pain relief and improvement of function in patients with knee pain.

METHODS

Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Medline, Central, Embase, PEDro, Lilacs, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to May 2019. Randomized clinical trials that compared resistance exercise with or without BFR to treat knee pain and function in individuals older than 18 years of age with knee pain were included.

RESULTS

Eight randomized clinical trials met the eligibility criteria and for the quantitative synthesis, five studies were included. The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) estimate showed that resistance exercises with BFR was not more effective than resistance exercises for reducing pain (SMD: -0.37cm, 95% CI=-0.93, 0.19) and improving knee function (SMD=-0.23 points, 95% CI=-0.71, 0.26) in patients with knee pain.

CONCLUSION

In the short term, there is low quality of evidence that resistance exercise with BFR does not provide significant differences in pain relief and knee function compared to resistance exercises in patients with knee pain. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018102839.