EFFECTS OF BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION TRAINING ON HANDGRIP STRENGTH AND MUSCULAR VOLUME OF YOUNG WOMEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-intensity training methods are generally recommended to increase muscle mass and strength, with training loads of 60-70% 1RM for novice and 80-100% 1RM for advanced individuals. Blood flow restriction training, despite using lower intensities (30-50% 1RM), can provide similar improvements in muscle mass and strength. However, studies commonly investigate the effects of blood flow restriction training in large muscular groups, whereas there are few studies that investigated those effects in smaller muscle groups, such as the muscles involved in grasping (e.g, wrist flexors; finger flexors). Clinically, smaller muscular groups should also be considered in intervention programs, given that repetitive stress, such as repeated strain injuries, affects upper limbs and may lead to chronic pain and incapacity for work. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of blood flow restriction training in strength and anthropometric indicators of muscular volume in young women. HYPOTHESIS: The effect of blood flow restriction training in handgrip strength (HGS) and muscular volume of young women can be similar to traditional training, even with lower loads. METHODS: Twenty-eight university students, 18 to 25 years of age, were randomly assigned into two groups, blood flow restriction training (BFR, n = 14) and traditional training (TRAD, n = 14). The anthropometric measures and maximum handgrip strength (MHGS) test were performed before and after the intervention. The participants did three weekly sessions of dynamic concentric contraction exercises on a dynamometer for four weeks (12 sessions). Each session had a time length of five minutes and the intensity was established from a percentage of MHGS at 30-35% in the first week, 40-45% in the second and 50-55% in third/fourth weeks. Three sets of 15-25 handgrip repetitions were performed until a failure with a 30 seconds rest for BFR training and three sets of 8-12 repetitions with one-minute rest for TRAD training. RESULTS: A significant increase was found in the arm muscle circumference (20.6 ± 2.2 vs 21.6 ± 1.7cm) and right MHGS (32.7 ± 4.5 vs 34.3 ± 4.1 kgf) and left MHGS (28.0 ± 5.5 vs 30.9 ± 4.1 kgf) for the BFR training, and the left MHGS (27.6 ± 5.0 vs 31.0 ± 6.1 kgf) for the TRAD training. CONCLUSION: Dynamometer training with blood flow restriction, performed with low to moderate loads, was more effective than the traditional training in increasing HGS and muscle volume in young women. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".