Muscular adaptations after two different volumes of blood flow-restricted training

Authors

  • J. Martín-Hernández,

    Corresponding author
    1. Research Centre on Physical Disability, ASPAYM Castilla y León Foundation, Valladolid, Spain
    • Faculty of Health Sciences, Miguel de Cervantes European University, Valladolid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • P. J. Marín,

    1. Faculty of Health Sciences, Miguel de Cervantes European University, Valladolid, Spain
    2. Research Centre on Physical Disability, ASPAYM Castilla y León Foundation, Valladolid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • H. Menéndez,

    1. Research Centre on Physical Disability, ASPAYM Castilla y León Foundation, Valladolid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • C. Ferrero,

    1. Research Centre on Physical Disability, ASPAYM Castilla y León Foundation, Valladolid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • J. P. Loenneke,

    1. Department of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • A. J. Herrero

    1. Faculty of Health Sciences, Miguel de Cervantes European University, Valladolid, Spain
    2. Research Centre on Physical Disability, ASPAYM Castilla y León Foundation, Valladolid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author

Corresponding author: Juan Martín-Hernández, BsC, Faculty of Health Sciences, Miguel de Cervantes European University, C/Padre Julio Chevalier, 2, 47012, Valladolid, Spain. Tel: +34 983 00 1000, Fax: +34 983 278 958, E-mail: martinhjuan@gmail.com

Abstract

This study aimed to gain an insight into the adaptations of muscle strength and skeletal muscle thickness after two different volumes of blood flow restriction training (BFRT), and compare them with high-intensity training. The sample was divided into four groups: low-volume, low-intensity BFRT (BFRT LV); high-volume, low-intensity BFRT (BFRT HV); traditional high-intensity resistance training (HIT); and a control group, which maintained their routine activities (CON). Leg extension one repetition maximum (1RM), isokinetic peak knee extension, and flexion torques at 60°/s and 180°/s as well as muscle thickness of the rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis (VL) were assessed at baseline and after 5 weeks of training BFRT LV (7.03%, P < 0.05), BFRT HV (6.24%, P < 0.05) and HIT (18.86%, P < 0.001) groups increased 1RM performance, while no changes were observed in the CON group. Muscle thickness of the RF and VL was increased irrespective of the training group (7.5%, P < 0.001; and 9.9%, P < 0.001, respectively). We conclude that doubling the exercise volume with BFRT causes no further benefit with muscular size or strength. Although similar increases in muscle thickness were observed between training groups, HIT increased 1RM performance to a greater extent compared to either volume of BFRT.

Ancillary