scholarly journals Hemodynamic responses to strength exercise with blood flow restriction during different phases of the menstrual cycle

Motricidade ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Rodrigues Neto ◽  
Jefferson Silva Novaes ◽  
Adenilson Targino de Araújo Júnior ◽  
Júlio César Gomes Silva ◽  
Rodrigo Poderoso Souza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Menstrual Cycle ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Strength Exercise ◽  
Double Product ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Low Load

The present study aimed to determine the influence of low-load (LL) resistance exercise (RE) with blood flow restriction (BFR) on systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP), heart rate (HR), double product (DP) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) during the phases of the menstrual cycle (MC). Thirty untrained women were randomly and proportionally divided into three groups: HI = high-intensity exercises (80% of one-repetition maximum (1RM)); LL = low-load exercises (20% of 1RM); and LL+BFR = LL exercises combined with BFR. The exercise sessions were performed during the 3rd-4th days (follicular phase), 16th day (ovulatory phase) and the 24th-26th days (luteal phase) of the MC. Before and immediately after the exercises, SBP, DBP, HR and SpO2 were evaluated. We observed an increase in SBP, HR and DP in the three phases of the MC for all groups (p < 0.05). Groups LL and/or LL+BFR exhibited a greater increase in SBP, DBP, MBP, HR and DP when compared with the HI group (p < 0.05), and in the three groups, SpO2 was not reduced (p > 0.05). There was a significant effect of the MC phases on HR and DP (p < 0.05). We conclude that the three groups exhibited increased SBP, HR and DP; however, SpO2 was not different. Furthermore, groups LL and LL+BFR exhibited greater increases in hemodynamics, and the MC phases seem to influence only HR and DP.

Haemodynamic responses to psychosocial stress during the menstrual cycle

1991 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Manhem ◽  
Christina Jern ◽  
Martin Pilhall ◽  
Guy Shanks ◽  
Sverker Jern
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Menstrual Cycle ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Psychosocial Stress ◽  
Mental Stress ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Two Phases ◽  
Plasma Catecholamine Concentrations

1. The haemodynamic effects of hormonal changes during the menstrual cycle were examined in 11 normotensive women (age 20–46 years). The subjects were studied on days 2–8 (follicular phase) and days 18–26 (luteal phase) in a randomized order. A standardized mental stress test and a 24 h recording of ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate were performed. 2. Pre-stress resting levels of heart rate and blood pressure were similar during the two phases of the menstrual cycle. 3. During mental stress, the heart rate response was significantly greater during the luteal phase than during the follicular phase (14.7 versus 9.7 beats/min; P < 0.05). 4. Blood pressure, plasma catecholamine concentrations and subjective stress experience increased significantly in response to stress, without any significant differences between the two phases. 5. During 24 h ambulatory monitoring, higher levels of systolic blood pressure and heart rate were observed in the luteal phase than in the follicular phase (P < 0.005 and P < 0.0001, respectively). 6. These data indicate that cyclic variations in female sex hormones not only affect systolic blood pressure and heart rate, but also alter the haemodynamic responses to psychosocial stress.

scholarly journals Effects of exercise training with blood flow restriction on blood pressure in medicated hypertensive patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Antônio Cezar ◽  
Clodoaldo Antônio De Sá ◽  
Vanessa da Silva Corralo ◽  
Sedinei Lopes Copatti ◽  
Guilherme Augusto Gonzaga dos Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Exercise Training ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Hypertensive Patients ◽  
Flow Restriction

Blood Flow Restriction Therapy Impact on Musculoskeletal Strength and Mass

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 263502542110326
Author(s):  
Steven R. Dayton ◽  
Simon J. Padanilam ◽  
Tyler C. Sylvester ◽  
Michael J. Boctor ◽  
Vehniah K. Tjong
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Load Resistance ◽  
High Load ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Occlusion Pressure ◽  
Total Occlusion ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Low Load

Background: Blood flow restriction (BFR) training restricts arterial inflow and venous outflow from the extremity and can produce gains in muscle strength at low loads. Low-load training reduces joint stress and decreases cardiovascular risk when compared with high-load training, thus making BFR an excellent option for many patients requiring rehabilitation. Indications: Blood flow restriction has shown clinical benefit in a variety of patient populations including healthy patients as well as those with osteoarthritis, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, polymyositis/dermatomyositis, and Achilles tendon rupture. Technique Description: This video demonstrates BFR training in 3 clinical areas: upper extremity resistance training, lower extremity resistance training, and low-intensity cycling. All applications of BFR first require determination of total occlusion pressure. Upper extremity training requires inflating the tourniquet to 50% of total occlusion pressure, while lower extremity exercises use 80% of total occlusion pressure. Low-load resistance training exercises follow a specific repetition scheme: 30 reps followed by a 30-second rest and then 3 sets of 15 reps with 30-seconds rest between each. During cycle training, 80% total occlusion pressure is used as the patient cycles for 15 minutes without rest. Results: Augmenting low-load resistance training with BFR increases muscle strength when compared with low-load resistance alone. In addition, low-load BFR has demonstrated an increase in muscle mass greater than low-load training alone and equivalent to high-load training absent BFR. A systematic review determined the safety of low-load training with BFR is comparable to traditional high-intensity resistance training. The most common adverse effects include exercise intolerance, discomfort, and dull pain which are also frequent in patients undergoing traditional resistance training. Severe adverse effects including deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and rhabdomyolysis are exceedingly rare, less than 0.006% according to a national survey. Patients undergoing BFR rehabilitation experience less perceived exertion and demonstrate decreased pain scores compared with high-load resistance training. Conclusion: Blood flow restriction training is an effective alternative to high-load resistance training for patients requiring musculoskeletal rehabilitation for multiple disease processes as well as in the perioperative setting. Blood flow restriction has been shown to be a safe training modality when managed by properly trained physical therapists and athletic trainers.

scholarly journals Muscle Adaptations to High-Load Training and Very Low-Load Training With and Without Blood Flow Restriction

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Jessee ◽  
Samuel L. Buckner ◽  
J. Grant Mouser ◽  
Kevin T. Mattocks ◽  
Scott J. Dankel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
High Load ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Muscle Adaptations ◽  
Low Load

scholarly journals Low-load blood flow restriction training induces similar morphological and mechanical Achilles tendon adaptations compared with high-load resistance training

2019 ◽  
Vol 127 (6) ◽  
pp. 1660-1667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Centner ◽  
Benedikt Lauber ◽  
Olivier R. Seynnes ◽  
Simon Jerger ◽  
Tim Sohnius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Load Resistance ◽  
High Load ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Resistance Training Program ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Low Load ◽  
Tendon Properties

Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training has gained increasing interest in the scientific community by demonstrating that increases in muscle mass and strength are comparable to conventional high-load (HL) resistance training. Although adaptations on the muscular level are well documented, there is little evidence on how LL-BFR training affects human myotendinous properties. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate morphological and mechanical Achilles tendon adaptations after 14 wk of strength training. Fifty-five male volunteers (27.9 ± 5.1 yr) were randomly allocated into the following three groups: LL-BFR [20–35% of one-repetition maximum (1RM)], HL (70–85% 1RM), or a nonexercising control (CON) group. The LL-BFR and HL groups completed a resistance training program for 14 wk, and tendon morphology, mechanical as well as material properties, and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and isometric strength were assessed before and after the intervention. Both HL (+40.7%) and LL-BFR (+36.1%) training induced significant increases in tendon stiffness ( P < 0.05) as well as tendon CSA (HL: +4.6%, LL-BFR: +7.8%, P < 0.001). These changes were comparable between groups without significant changes in Young’s modulus. Furthermore, gastrocnemius medialis muscle CSA and plantar flexor strength significantly increased in both training groups ( P < 0.05), whereas the CON group did not show significant changes in any of the evaluated parameters. In conclusion, the adaptive change in Achilles tendon properties following low-load resistance training with partial vascular occlusion appears comparable to that evoked by high-load resistance training. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training has been shown to induce beneficial adaptations at the muscular level. However, studies examining the effects on human tendon properties are rare. The findings provide first evidence that LL-BFR can increase Achilles tendon mechanical and morphological properties to a similar extent as conventional high-load resistance training. This is of particular importance for individuals who may not tolerate heavy training loads but still aim for improvements in myotendinous function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document