Non-failure blood flow restricted exercise induces similar muscle adaptations and less discomfort than failure protocols.

ABSTRACT

Low-load blood flow restricted resistance exercise (BFRE) performed to volitional failure is suggested to constitute an effective method for producing increases in muscle size and function. However, BFRE to failure may entail high levels of perceived exertion, discomfort, and/or delayed onset of muscle soreness (DOMS). The aim of the study was to compare BFRE performed to volitional failure (F-BFRE) vs non-failure BFRE (NF-BFRE) on changes in muscle size, function and perceptual responses. Fourteen young untrained males had one leg randomized to knee extension F-BFRE while the contralateral leg performed NF-BFRE. The training consisted of 22 exercise bouts over an 8-week period. Whole-muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of quadriceps components, muscle function, and DOMS were assessed before and after the training period. Perceived exertion and discomfort were registered during each exercise bout. Both F-BFRE and NF-BFRE produced regional increases in muscle CSA in the range of quadriceps (2.5%-3.8%), vastus lateralis (8.1%-8.5%), and rectus femoris (7.9%-25.0%). All without differences between leg. Muscle strength (6.8%-11.5%) and strength-endurance capacity (13.9%-18.6%) also increased to a similar degree in both legs. Less perceived exertion, discomfort, and DOMS were reported with NF-BFRE compared to F-BFRE. In conclusion, non-failure BFRE enables increases in muscle size and muscle function, while involving reduced perceptions of exertion, discomfort, and DOMS. Non-failure BFRE may be a more feasible approach in clinical settings.