Pneumatic Compression vs Blood Flow Restriction for Muscle Soreness
Recruiting in Palo Alto (17 mi)
Age: 18 - 65
Sex: Any
Travel: May be covered
Time Reimbursement: Varies
Trial Phase: Academic
Recruiting
Sponsor: University of Southern California
No Placebo Group
Trial Summary
What is the purpose of this trial?Both BFR and intermittent pneumatic compression are purported to decrease symptoms associated with exercise induced muscle damage (EIMD) that cause delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Blood flow restriction relies on applying pressurized cuffs to the most proximal portion of the limb. Another form of recovery often relied upon is pneumatic compression. The mechanism by which pneumatic compression works is similar to that of a massage, whereby the device progressively increases the pressure on a portion of the limb before releasing and moving further up the limb.The purpose of this study is determine whether BFR or pneumatic compression can be used to decreased DOMS which may indicate enhanced recovery.
Will I have to stop taking my current medications?
The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications. However, women must be on a form of hormonal contraception to participate.
What data supports the effectiveness of the treatment Blood Flow Restriction for muscle soreness?
The research suggests that while Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) therapy is generally safe and can increase muscle size and strength when combined with low loads, there is not enough evidence to confirm its effectiveness specifically for reducing muscle soreness. Some studies indicate a potential protective effect on muscle soreness when BFR is used after exercise, but more research is needed to establish clear benefits.
12345Is blood flow restriction safe for humans?
Blood flow restriction (BFR) is generally considered safe when used properly in a clinical setting, with most side effects being mild, such as tingling and muscle soreness. Serious side effects like fainting and subcutaneous hemorrhaging are rare.
13456How does the treatment of blood flow restriction differ from other treatments for muscle soreness?
Blood flow restriction (BFR) is unique because it involves applying pressure to restrict blood flow to muscles during exercise, which can enhance muscle growth and recovery even with low-intensity workouts. This method is different from traditional treatments that might focus on rest or medication, as BFR actively engages the muscles while limiting blood flow to potentially reduce soreness and promote recovery.
12378Eligibility Criteria
This trial is for individuals experiencing muscle soreness after exercise, specifically delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). The study aims to find out if two different treatments can help with recovery. Details on who can join or reasons for exclusion are not provided.Inclusion Criteria
I do not have any current injuries or diseases affecting my muscles or bones.
I am between 18 and 30 years old.
Exclusion Criteria
I have a history of blood clots.
I have cancerous growths.
I have a bone that has recently broken and not yet healed.
I have acute pulmonary edema.
I have been diagnosed with sudden heart failure.
I have had a pulmonary embolism.
I currently have an acute infection.
I have had a bone fracture or dislocation.
I have had a deep vein thrombosis.
I have a recent case of inflamed veins due to a blood clot.
Participant Groups
The trial is testing the effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) and Pneumatic Compression in reducing symptoms of exercise-induced muscle damage. BFR involves pressurized cuffs on limbs, while pneumatic compression mimics massage by applying pressure.
3Treatment groups
Experimental Treatment
Active Control
Group I: Pneumatic compressionExperimental Treatment1 Intervention
The participants will be asked to refrain from exercise 24 hours prior to and following the exercise. Participants will complete all pre-exercise tests (DOMS, CMJ, MVIC). The exercise consists of running on a treadmill situated at a -10% grade at 9 km/hr (5.59 mph) for 20 minutes. This is proceeded and followed by 5 minute warm-up/cool-down periods. Those allocated to the "pneumatic compression" group will receive 20 minutes of pneumatic compression at 100 mmHg.
Group II: Blood flow restrictionExperimental Treatment1 Intervention
The participants will be asked to refrain from exercise 24 hours prior to and following the exercise. Participants will complete all pre-exercise tests (DOMS, CMJ, MVIC). The exercise consists of running on a treadmill situated at a -10% grade at 9 km/hr (5.59 mph) for 20 minutes. This is proceeded and followed by 5 minute warm-up/cool-down periods.
Those allocated to the "BFR" group will receive 4 rounds of treatment: 3 minutes will be spent at 100% of resting limb occlusion pressure, followed by 2 minutes of 0% occlusion.
Group III: ControlActive Control1 Intervention
The participants will be asked to refrain from exercise 24 hours prior to and following the exercise. Participants will complete all pre-exercise tests (DOMS, CMJ, MVIC). The exercise consists of running on a treadmill situated at a -10% grade at 9 km/hr (5.59 mph) for 20 minutes. This is proceeded and followed by 5 minute warm-up/cool-down periods.
Those that are allocated to the "control" group, will not receive treatment after the downhill running protocol.
Find A Clinic Near You
Research locations nearbySelect from list below to view details:
University of Southern CaliforniaLos Angeles, CA
Loading ...
Who is running the clinical trial?
University of Southern CaliforniaLead Sponsor
References
Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Technique on Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: A Systematic Review. [2022]Background and Objectives: The effect of the blood flow restriction technique (BFR) on delayed onset muscular soreness (DOMS) symptoms remains unclear. Since there is no consensus in the literature, the aim of the present study is to systematically identify and appraise the available evidence on the effects of the BFR technique on DOMS, in healthy subjects. Materials and Methods: Computerized literature search in the databases Pubmed, Google Scholar, EBSCO, Cochrane and PEDro to identify randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of blood flow restriction on delayed onset muscular soreness symptoms. Results: Eight trials met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review, presenting the results of 118 participants, with a mean methodological rating of 6/10 on the PEDro scale. Conclusions: So far, there is not enough evidence to confirm or refute the influence of BFR on DOMS, and more studies with a good methodological basis are needed, in larger samples, to establish protocols and parameters of exercise and intervention. Data analysis suggests a tendency toward the proinflammatory effect of BFR during high restrictive pressures combined with eccentric exercises, while postconditioning BFR seems to have a protective effect on DOMS. Prospero ID record: 345457, title registration: "Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Technique on the Prevention of Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: A Systematic Review".
The Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Therapy on Recovery After Experimentally Induced Muscle Weakness and Pain. [2022]Wong, V, Dankel, SJ, Spitz, RW, Bell, ZW, Viana, RB, Chatakondi, RN, Abe, T, and Loenneke, JP. The effect of blood flow restriction therapy on recovery after experimentally induced muscle weakness and pain. J Strength Cond Res 36(4): 1147-1152, 2022-The purpose was to determine if blood flow restriction with no external load could be used as a means of active therapy after experimentally induced fatigue and soreness. Twelve women and 7 men (aged 18-35 years) participated in a randomized controlled trial using a within-subject design. The study intervention was 3 consecutive visits. Visit 1 included the fatiguing/soreness-inducing protocol for the elbow flexors, which was performed only once during the study. Torque was measured before/after to confirm individuals began in a weakened state. Subjects then completed blood flow restriction therapy on one arm and the sham therapy on the other. Subjects performed elbow flexion/contraction with no external load on both arms. Torque was measured once more 10 minutes after the fatiguing/soreness-inducing protocol. Twenty-four hours later, soreness and torque were assessed in each arm, followed by another bout of therapy. Forty-eight hours after the initial visit, soreness and torque were measured again. There were no differences (median difference [95% credible interval]) in the recovery of torque between the blood flow restriction and sham therapy conditions at 10 minutes (0.5 [-2.7, 3.8] N·m), 24 hours (-2.34 [-6, 1.14] N·m), or 48 hours (-1.94 [-5.45, 1.33] N·m). There were also no differences in ratings of soreness at 24 hours (-2.48 [-10.05, 5.05]) or 48 hours (2.58 [-4.96, 10.09]). Our results indicate that this specific model of blood flow restriction therapy did not enhance the recovery of the muscle compared with a sham condition without the application of pressure.
Application and side effects of blood flow restriction technique: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of professionals. [2023]The physiological benefits of applying blood flow restriction (BFR) in isolation or in the presence of physical exercise have been widely documented in the scientific literature. Most investigations carried out under controlled laboratory conditions have found the technique to be safe. However, few studies have analyzed the use of the technique in clinical settings.To analyze how the BFR technique has been applied by professionals working in the clinical area and the prevalence of side effects (SEs) resulting from the use of this technique.This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 136 Brazilian professionals who perform some function related to physical rehabilitation, sports science, or physical conditioning participated in this study. Participants answered a self-administered online questionnaire consisting of 21 questions related to the professional profile and methodological aspects and SEs of the BFR technique.Professionals reported applying the BFR technique on individuals from different age groups from youth (≤18 years; 3.5%) to older adults (60-80 years; 30.7%), but mainly on people within the age group of 20 to 29 years (74.6%). A total of 99.1% of the professionals coupled the BFR technique with resistance exercise. Their main goals were muscle hypertrophy and physical rehabilitation. The majority (60.9%) of interviewees reported using BFR in durations of less than 5 minutes and the pressure used was mainly determined through the values of brachial blood pressure and arterial occlusion. Moreover, 92% of professionals declared observing at least 1 SE resulting from the BFR technique. Most professionals observed tingling (71.2%) and delayed onset of muscle soreness (55.8%). Rhabdomyolysis, fainting, and subcutaneous hemorrhaging were reported less frequently (1.9%, 3.8%, and 4.8%, respectively).Our findings indicate that the prescription of blood flow restriction technique results in minimal serious side effects when it is done in a proper clinical environment and follows the proposed recommendations found in relevant scientific literature.
Acute Muscular Responses to Practical Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Exercise Versus Traditional Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction and High-/Low-Load Exercise. [2021]Blood flow restriction (BFR) increases muscle size and strength when combined with low loads, but various methods are used to produce this stimulus. It is unclear how using elastic knee wraps can impact acute muscular responses compared with using nylon cuffs, where the pressure can be standardized.
Beneath the cuff: Often overlooked and under-reported blood flow restriction device features and their potential impact on practice-A review of the current state of the research. [2023]Training with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to be a useful technique to improve muscle hypertrophy, muscle strength and a host of other physiological benefits in both healthy and clinical populations using low intensities [20%-30% 1-repetition maximum (1RM) or <50% maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max)]. However, as BFR training is gaining popularity in both practice and research, there is a lack of awareness for potentially important design characteristics and features associated with BFR cuff application that may impact the acute and longitudinal responses to training as well as the safety profile of BFR exercise. While cuff width and cuff material have been somewhat addressed in the literature, other cuff design and features have received less attention. This manuscript highlights additional cuff design and features and hypothesizes on their potential to impact the response and safety profile of BFR. Features including the presence of autoregulation during exercise, the type of bladder system used, the shape of the cuff, the set pressure versus the interface pressure, and the bladder length will be addressed as these variables have the potential to alter the responses to BFR training. As more devices enter the marketplace for consumer purchase, investigations specifically looking at their impact is warranted. We propose numerous avenues for future research to help shape the practice of BFR that may ultimately enhance efficacy and safety using a variety of BFR technologies.
Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction on Functionality, Quality of Life and Pain in Patients with Neuromusculoskeletal Pathologies: A Systematic Review. [2023]Blood flow restriction is characterized as a method used during exercise at low loads of around 20-40% of a repetition maximum, or at a low-moderate intensity of aerobic exercise, in which cuffs that occlude the proximal part of the extremities can partially reduce arterial flow and fully restrict the venous flow of the musculature in order to achieve the same benefits as high-load exercise.
Blood flow restriction: effects of cuff type on fatigue and perceptual responses to resistance exercise. [2014]Blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with low load resistance training has been shown to result in muscle hypertrophy similar to that observed with higher loads. However, not all studies have found BFR efficacious, possibly due to methodological differences. It is presently unclear whether there are differences between cuffs of similar size (5 cm) but different material (nylon vs. elastic). The purpose was to determine if there are differences in repetitions to fatigue and perceptual ratings of exertion (RPE) and discomfort between narrow elastic and narrow nylon cuffs. Sixteen males and females completed three sets of BFR knee extension exercise in a randomized cross-over design using either elastic or nylon restrictive cuffs applied at the proximal thigh. There were no differences in repetitions to fatigue (marker of blood flow) or perceptual ratings between narrow elastic and narrow nylon cuffs. This data suggests that either elastic or nylon cuffs of the same width should cause similar degrees of BFR at the same pressure during resistance exercise.
Neuromuscular Responses to Failure vs Non-Failure During Blood Flow Restriction Training in Untrained Females. [2023]Applying blood flow restriction (BFR) during resistance exercise is a potent stimulus of muscular adaption, but there is little direct comparison of its effect on neuromuscular function. The purpose of this investigation was to compare surface electromyography amplitude and frequency responses during a 75 (1 × 30, 3 × 15) repetition bout (BFR-75) of BFR to 4 sets to failure (BFR-F). Twelve women (mean ± SD age = 22 ± 4 years; body mass = 72 ± 14.4 kg; height = 162.1 ± 4.0 cm) volunteered for the investigation. One leg was randomly assigned to complete BFR-75 and the other to BFR-F. Each leg performed isokinetic, unilateral, concentric-eccentric, leg extension at 30% of maximal strength while surface electromyographic (sEMG) data was recorded. More repetitions (p = 0.006) were completed during set 2 for BFR-F (21.2 ± 7.4) than BFR-75 (14.7 ± 1.2), but there were no other between condition differences for set 1 (29.8 ± 0.9 vs 28.9 ± 10.1), set 3 (14.4 ± 1.4 vs 17.1 ± 6.9), or set 4 (14.8 ± 0.9 vs 16.3 ± 7.0). Collapsed across condition, normalized sEMG amplitude increased (p = 0.014, 132.66 ± 14.03% to 208.21 ± 24.82%) across the first three sets of exercise then plateaued, while normalized sEMG frequency decreased (p = 0.342, 103.07 ± 3.89% to 83.73 ± 4.47%) across the first two sets then plateaued. The present findings indicated that BFR-75 and BFR-F elicited similar acute neuromuscular fatigue responses. The plateau in amplitude and frequency suggested that maximal motor unit excitation and metabolic buildup may be maximized after two to three sets of BFR-75 and BFR-F.