Purpose. The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of low-load blood flow restriction (LLBFR) and low-load non-BFR (LL) on neuromuscular function following a bout of standardized, fatiguing leg extension muscle actions. Methods. Fourteen men (mean age ± SD = 23±4 yrs) volunteered to participate in this investigation and randomly performed LLBFR and LL on separate days. Resistance exercise consisted of 75 isotonic, unilateral leg extension muscle actions performed at 30% of one-repetition maximum. Prior to (pretest) and after (posttest) performing each bout of exercise, strength and neural assessments were determined. Results. There was no pretest to posttest differences between LLBFR and LL for maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) torque or V-wave/M-wave responses (muscle compound action potentials assessed during a superimposed MVIC muscle action) which exhibited decreases (collapsed across condition) of 41.2% and 26.2%, respectively. There were pretest to posttest decreases in peak twitch torque (36.0%) and sEMG (29.5%) for LLBFR but not LL, and larger decreases in voluntary activation for LLBFR (11.3%) than LL (4.5%). Conclusions. These findings suggested that LLBFR elicited greater fatigue-induced decreases in several indices of neuromuscular function relative to LL. Despite this, both LLBFR and LL resulted in similar decrements in performance as assessed by maximal strength.

BACKGROUND: Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LL + BFR) attenuated delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) under some conditions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study examined the effects of reciprocal concentric-only elbow flexion-extension muscle actions at 30% of peak torque on indices of DOMS. METHODS: Thirty untrained women (mean ± SD; 22 ± 2.4 years) were randomly assigned to 6 training days of LL + BFR (n= 10), low-load non-BFR (LL) (n= 10), or control (n= 10). Participants completed 4 sets (1 × 30, 3 × 15) of submaximal (30% of peak torque), unilateral, isokinetic (120∘s-1) muscle actions. Indices of DOMS including peak power, resting elbow joint angle (ROM), perceived muscle soreness (VAS), and pain pressure threshold (PPT) were assessed. RESULTS: There were no changes in peak power, ROM, or VAS. There was a significant interaction for PPT. Follow-up analyses indicated PPT increased for the LL + BFR condition (Day 5 > Day 2), but did not decrease below baseline. The results of the present study indicated LL + BFR and LL did not induce DOMS for the elbow extensors in previously untrained women. CONCLUSION: These findings suggested LL + BFR and LL concentric-only resistance training could be an effective training modality to elicit muscular adaptation without inducing DOMS.

No abstract

There is conflicting evidence regarding the prevalence and magnitude of exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) following low-load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (LL + BFR) that may be related to exercise protocols. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the effects of 75-repetition (BFR-75) (1 × 30, 3 × 15) and 4 sets to failure (BFR-4x) protocols on indices of EIMD among untrained women. Thirteen women completed this investigation. One leg was randomly assigned to BFR-75 and the other to BFR-4x. Each leg performed isokinetic, unilateral, concentric-eccentric, leg extension muscle actions at 30% of maximal strength. Indices of EIMD (muscle soreness, range of motion [ROM], limb circumference, pain pressure threshold [PPT], and maximal voluntary isometric contraction [MVIC]) were recorded before exercise, 0-, 24-, 48-, 72-, and 96-hours post-exercise. There were no changes for ROM, circumference, or PPT. Muscle soreness increased similarly in both conditions 0-, 24-, and 48hours post-exercise and MVIC increased 24-, 48-, 72-, and 96-hours post-exercise. These findings suggested BFR-75 and BFR-4x were not associated with EIMD and elicited similar physiological responses. The increases in muscle soreness may be due to metabolic stress associated with LL + BFR protocols apart from EIMD.

RESULTS:There was no significant (p=0.294-0.823) interaction or main effect for normalized EMG amplitude. For EMG frequency and MT there were significant interactions (p=0.008) that indicated greater decreases in EMG frequency following isotonic (13%) than isokinetic (6%) but similar increases in MT (22%). For RPE, there was no significant (p=0.368) interaction, but there were significant (p=0.004) main effects for Time (set 4 > set 3 > set 2 > set 1) and Condition (isotonic > isokinetic) (p=0.018). Additionally, there was a greater (34.9%) decrease in MVIC following the isotonic than isokinetic (15.2%) condition. CONCLUSIONS: Isotonic BFR exercise elicited greater fatigue-induced changes in EMG frequency, MVIC, and perceived effort than isokinetic condition. Therefore, relative to isokinetic, isotonic BFR exercise may provide a more potent acute exercise response and discomfort, but this may not translate to chronic adaptations as there were similar EMG amplitude responses between conditions.