Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction Compared to Traditional Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Mass in Non-Active Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training on Autonomic and Endothelial Function in Persons with Parkinson's Disease

Background

Autonomic dysfunction precedes endothelial dysfunction in Parkinson's disease (PD) and causes blood pressure and circulation abnormalities that are highly disruptive to one's quality of life. While exercise interventions have proven helpful for motor symptoms of PD, improving associated non-motor symptoms is limited. Low-intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction (LIRT-BFR) improves autonomic dysfunction in non-PD patients and high-intensity resistance training (HIRT) is recommended for motor symptom improvements for people with PD (PwPD).

Objective

To determine the effects of LIRT-BFR and HIRT on homocysteine and autonomic and endothelial function in PwPD and to determine the hemodynamic loads during LIRT-BFR and HIRT in PwPD using a novel exercise protocol.

Methods

Thirty-eight PwPD were assigned LIRT-BFR, HIRT or to a control (CNTRL) group. The LIRT-BFR and HIRT groups exercised three days per week for four weeks. The LIRT-BFR protocol used 60% limb occlusion pressure (LOP) and performed three sets of 20 repetitions at 20% of the one-repetition maximum (1RM). The HIRT group performed three sets of eight repetitions at 80% 1RM. The CNTRL group was asked to continue their normal daily routines.

Results

LIRT-BFR significantly improved orthostatic hypotension (p = 0.026), homocysteine levels (p < 0.001), peripheral circulation (p = 0.003), supine blood pressure (p = 0.028) and heart rate variability (p = 0.041); LIRT-BFR improved homocysteine levels (p < 0.018), peripheral circulation (p = 0.005), supine blood pressure (p = 0.007) and heart rate variability (p = 0.047) more than HIRT; and hemodynamic loads for LIRT-BFR and HIRT were similar.

Conclusions

LIRT-BFR may be more effective than HIRT for autonomic and endothelial function improvements in PwPD and hemodynamic loads may be lessened in LIRT-BFR protocols using single-joint exercises with intermittent blood flow restriction. Further research is needed to determine if non-motor symptoms improve over time and if results are sustainable.

Comparing the efficacy of low-load resistance exercise combined with blood flow restriction versus conventional-load resistance exercise in Chinese community-dwelling older people with sarcopenic obesity: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Sarcopenic obesity (SO) is characterised by decreased muscle mass, diminished muscle strength and/or reduced physical performance and a high percentage of body fat (PBF). Conventional-load resistance exercise (CRE) may be difficult for older people with SO owing to their declining physical functions. Low-load resistance exercise (LRE) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR; LRE-BFR) is a viable alternative to CRE for improving muscle mass and strength and potential exercise mode for managing SO. This study has two objectives: (1) to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of CRE and LRE-BFR in improving body composition, muscle strength, physical performance, haematological parameters, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and quality of life and (2) to compare the efficacy of CRE and LRE-BFR and explore their potential mechanisms.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This work is a 12-week assessor-blinded randomised clinical trial that will be conducted thrice a week. Sarcopenia will be defined using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019, and obesity will be determined using the criteria developed by the World Health Organization. Community-dwelling older people aged ≥ 65 years will be screened as the participants using inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 33 participants will be randomised into a CRE group (n = 11), an LRE-BFR group (n = 11) and a control group that will be given only health education (n = 11). The primary outcomes will be knee extensor strength and PBF, and the secondary outcomes will be body composition, anthropometric measurements, muscle strength of upper limbs, physical performance, haematological parameters, CVD risk factors and quality of life. The outcomes will be measured at the baseline (week 0), end of the intervention (week 12) and follow up (week 24). All the collected data will be analysed following the intention-to-treat principle.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Research Committee has approved this study (approval No. CMEC-2022-KT-51). Changes or developments in this study will be reported at www.chictr.org.cn .

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2300067296 (3 January 2023).

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.

Effects of blood-flow restricted exercise versus conventional resistance training in musculoskeletal disorders-a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of low-load blood flow restricted resistance training (BFR-RT) versus high-load resistance training (HL-RT) on muscle strength, muscle mass, physical function, patient-reported outcomes, and adherence to training in clinical musculoskeletal populations.

DATA SOURCES

Web of Science, Cochrane Central, Medline, Embase, SportDiscus was searched on the 30th May 2022.

REVIEW METHODS

This study was conducted as a systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included if they (i) included patients, (ii) comprised of a BFR-RT intervention protocol and a group who performed HL-RT (≥ 70%1RM) for at least eight exercise sessions, and (iii) involved at least 1 exercise that targeted the lower limbs. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. The meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model with an adjustment to the confidence interval.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs comprising 303 participants (BFR-RT: n = 151; HL-RT: n = 152) were identified. HL-RT and BFR-RT showed similar gains in dynamic (1-10RM) knee extensor strength and leg press strength, quadriceps cross sectional area, sit-to-stand performance, and patient reported pain and function. There was a moderate effect favoring BFR-RT for increasing maximal isometric knee extensor strength. The grading of certainty in evidence was low-to-very low for all outcome variables.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis extends our current knowledge about BFR-RT and HL-RT as equally effective exercise methods for inducing gains in maximal muscle strength in healthy populations, by now also comprising patients suffering from various clinical musculoskeletal conditions. The certainty in the estimates was low-to-very low, prompting the inclusion of future higher-quality trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ID (CRD42022337173). Registered June 18th 2022.

The Effect of Low Intensity Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction on Fall Resistance in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the effect of low intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction on fall resistance in middle-aged and older adults.

METHODS

PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO host, CNKI Database, VIP, Wanfang Database and CBMdisc were searched, and the retrieval period was from the beginning of each database to 25 July 2022. Randomized controlled trials were collected concerning the intervention of low intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction on lower limb muscle strength, muscle mass, muscle function, balance, walking and other fall resistance indicators in middle-aged and older adults. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used for methodological quality assessment of the included literature. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software and Stata 15.1.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials (419 participants in total) were included in the study. Meta-analysis results revealed that low intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction significantly improved lower limb muscle strength (SMD = 0.51, 95%CI: [0.28, 0.74], p < 0.0001), lower limb muscle mass (MD = 1.99, 95%CI: [0.77, 3.22], p = 0.001) and walking ability (SMD = -0.89, 95% CI. [-1.71, -0.06], p = 0.03), while there was no apparent intervention effect on lower limb muscle function (SMD = 0.25, 95%CI: [-0.23, 0.73], p = 0.31) and balance (SMD = 0.22, 95%CI: [-0.08, 0.52], p = 0.15). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the intervention effect of low intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction on lower limb muscle strength was more significant in subjects aged 55-64 years, with exercise cycles of 4-8 weeks, exercise frequency of three times per week, exercise intensity of 20-30% 1RM, and vascular flow blocking pressure ≥ 120 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

Low intensity resistance training with blood flow restriction can effectively improve lower limb muscle strength, muscle mass and walking ability in middle-aged and older adults, and can serve as an important form of fall resistance training for the older adults.

The effects of upper body blood flow restriction training on muscles located proximal to the applied occlusive pressure: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction combined with low load resistance training (LL-BFRT) is associated with increases in upper limb muscle strength and size. The effect of LL-BFRT on upper limb muscles located proximal to the BFR cuff application is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of LL-BFRT compared to low load, or high load resistance training (LL-RT, HL-RT) on musculature located proximal to cuff placement.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers independently evaluated the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. We performed a meta-analysis using a random effects model, or calculated mean differences (fixed-effect) where appropriate. We judged the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

The systematic literature searched yielded 346 articles, of which 9 studies were eligible. The evidence for all outcomes was of very low to low certainty. Across all comparisons, a significant increase in bench press and shoulder flexion strength was found in favor of LL-BFRT compared to LL-RT, and in shoulder lean mass and pectoralis major thickness in favor of the LL-BFRT compared to LL-RT and HL-RT, respectively. No significant differences were found between LL-BFRT and HL-RT in muscle strength.

CONCLUSION

With low certainty LL-BFRT appears to be equally effective to HL-RT for improving muscle strength in upper body muscles located proximal to the BFR stimulus in healthy adults. Furthermore, LL-BFRT may induce muscle size increase, but these adaptations are not superior to LL-RT or HL-RT.

Physiological adaptations and myocellular stress in short-term, high-frequency blood flow restriction training: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

High frequency (1-2 times per day) low-intensity blood flow restriction (BFR) training has been recommended as a prescription approach for short durations of time to maximize relevant physiological adaptations. However, some studies demonstrate negative physiological changes after short periods of high-frequency BFR training, including prolonged strength decline and muscle fiber atrophy.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of short-term, high-frequency blood flow restriction training, including main adaptations, myocellular stress, limitations in the literature, and future perspectives.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed®, and Web of Science) was performed from the earliest record to April 23, 2022. Two independent reviewers selected experimental studies that analyzed physical training protocols (aerobic or resistance) of high weekly frequency (>4 days/week) and short durations (≤3 weeks).

RESULTS

In total, 22 studies were included in this review. The samples were composed exclusively of young predominantly male individuals. Muscle strength and hypertrophy were the main outcomes analyzed in the studies. In general, studies have demonstrated increases in strength and muscle size after short term (1-3 weeks), high-frequency low-intensity BFR training, non-failure, but not after control conditions (non-BFR; equalized training volume). Under failure conditions, some studies have demonstrated strength decline and muscle fiber atrophy after BFR conditions, accompanying increases in muscle damage markers. Significant limitations exist in the current HF-BFR literature due to large heterogeneities in methodologies.

CONCLUSION

The synthesis presented indicates that short-term, high-frequency BFR training programs can generate significant neuromuscular adaptations. However, in resistance training to failure, strength declines and muscle fiber atrophy were reported. Currently, there are no studies analyzing low-frequency vs. high-frequency in short-term BFR training. Comparisons between resistance exercises of similar intensities (e.g., combined effort) are lacking, limiting conclusions on whether the effect is a product of proximity to failure or a specific effect of BFR.

Effects of Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy Compared with Traditional Resistance Training in Healthy Adults Older Than 60 Years: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is clinical interest in determining the effects of low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy compared with traditional high- and low-load (HL and LL) resistance training in healthy older adults and the influence of LL-BFR training cuff-pressure on these outcomes.

METHODS

A search was performed on the MEDLINE, PEDro, CINHAL, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases.

RESULTS

The analysis included 14 studies. HL resistance training produces a small increase in muscle strength (eight studies; SMD, -0.23 [-0.41; -0.05]) but not in muscle hypertrophy (six studies; (SMD, 0.08 [-0.22; 0.38]) when compared with LL-BFR resistance training. Compared with traditional LL resistance training, LL-BFR resistance training produces small-moderate increases in muscle strength (seven studies; SMD, 0.44 [0.28; 0.60]) and hypertrophy (two studies; SMD, 0.51 [0.06; 0.96]). There were greater improvements in muscle strength when higher cuff pressures were applied versus traditional LL resistance training but not versus HL resistance training.

CONCLUSIONS

LL-BFR resistance training results in lower muscle strength gains than HL resistance training and greater than traditional LL resistance training in healthy adults older than 60 years. LL-BFR resistance training promotes a similar muscle hypertrophy to HL resistance training but is greater than that of traditional LL resistance training. Applying cuff pressures above the limb occlusion pressure could enhance the increases in muscle strength compared with traditional LL resistance training.

Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Combined with Low-Intensity Resistance Training on Lower-Limb Muscle Strength and Mass in Post-Middle-Aged Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

We studied the effect of blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with low-intensity resistance training (LIRT) on lower-limb muscle strength and mass in post-middle-aged adults. The PubMed, OVID, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were used to obtain randomized controlled trials, and the effects of BFR and LIRT (BFRt) on muscle strength and mass in adults were examined. The Cochrane risk of bias tool assessed bias in the included trials. The combined effects of BFR and LIRT (BFRt) were calculated by meta-analysis, the association between muscle strength/mass and interventions was determined by meta-regression, and beneficial variables of intervention were explored by subgroup analysis. A total of 11 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effects showed that BFRt significantly improved lower extremity muscle strength but not muscle mass gain. Meta-regression analysis indicated that the effect of BFRt on changes in muscle strength was correlated with frequency of the intervention. Subgroup analysis revealed that BFRt achieved greater muscle strength gains than normal activity, LIRT, and similar muscle strength gains compared to high-intensity resistance training. The increased muscle strength after BFRt was noticed with a frequency of three times a week, but not with a frequency of two times a week, and the difference between these subgroups was statistically significant. Our findings indicate that BFRt can increase lower-limb muscle strength in post-middle-aged adults. Frequency of intervention is a key variable; particularly, a schedule of three times a week is effective in improving muscle strength.

Beneficial Role of Blood Flow Restriction Exercise in Heart Disease and Heart Failure Using the Muscle Hypothesis of Chronic Heart Failure and a Growing Literature

Background: Blood flow restriction exercise (BFRE) has become a common method to increase skeletal muscle strength and hypertrophy for individuals with a variety of conditions. A substantial literature of BFRE in older adults exists in which significant gains in strength and functional performance have been observed without report of adverse events. Research examining the effects of BFRE in heart disease (HD) and heart failure (HF) appears to be increasing for which reason the Muscle Hypothesis of Chronic Heart Failure (MHCHF) will be used to fully elucidate the effects BFRE may have in patients with HD and HF highlighted in the MHCHF.

Methods: A comprehensive literature review was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane library through February 2022. Inclusion criteria were: 1) the study was original research conducted in human subjects older than 18 years of age and diagnosed with either HD or HF, 2) study participants performed BFRE, and 3) post-intervention outcome measures of cardiovascular function, physical performance, skeletal muscle function and structure, and/or systemic biomarkers were provided. Exclusion criteria included review articles and articles on viewpoints and opinions of BFRE, book chapters, theses, dissertations, and case study articles.

Results: Seven BFRE studies in HD and two BFRE studies in HF were found of which four of the HD and the two HF studies examined a variety of measures reflected within the MHCHF over a period of 8–24 weeks. No adverse events were reported in any of the studies and significant improvements in skeletal muscle strength, endurance, and work as well as cardiorespiratory performance, mitochondrial function, exercise tolerance, functional performance, immune humoral function, and possibly cardiac performance were observed in one or more of the reviewed studies.

Conclusion: In view of the above systematic review, BFRE has been performed safely with no report of adverse event in patients with a variety of different types of HD and in patients with HF. The components of the MHCHF that can be potentially improved with BFRE include left ventricular dysfunction, inflammatory markers, inactivity, a catabolic state, skeletal and possibly respiratory muscle myopathy, dyspnea and fatigue, ANS activity, and peripheral blood flow. Furthermore, investigation of feasibility, acceptability, adherence, adverse effects, and symptoms during and after BFRE is needed since very few studies have examined these important issues comprehensively in patients with HD and HF.

Selected Methods of Resistance Training for Prevention and Treatment of Sarcopenia

Resistance training is an extremely beneficial intervention to prevent and treat sarcopenia. In general, traditional high-load resistance training improves skeletal muscle morphology and strength, but this method is impractical and may even reduce arterial compliance by about 20% in aged adults. Thus, the progression of resistance training methods for improving the strength and morphology of muscles without applying a high load is essential. Over the past two decades, various resistance training methods that can improve skeletal muscle mass and muscle function without using high loads have attracted attention, and their training effects, molecular mechanisms, and safety have been reported. The present study focuses on the relationship between exercise load/intensity, training effects, and physiological mechanisms as well as the safety of various types of resistance training that have attracted attention as a measure against sarcopenia. At present, there is much research evidence that blood-flow-restricted low-load resistance training (20–30% of one repetition maximum (1RM)) has been reported as a sarcopenia countermeasure in older adults. Therefore, this training method may be particularly effective in preventing sarcopenia.