Effect of High-Intensity Interval Exercise versus Continuous Low-Intensity Aerobic Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction on Psychophysiological Responses: A Randomized Crossover Study.

This study compared the effect of continuous low-intensity aerobic exercise with blood flow restriction (LI-AE-BFR) versus high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE), matching total external mechanical work between conditions, on perceptual (exertion, pain, affective and pleasure) and physiological responses (heart rate [HR], blood lactate [BL] and muscle fatigue). Ten healthy untrained men (25.6 ± 3.78 years old; 75.02 ± 12.02 kg; 172.2 ± 6.76 cm; 24.95 ± 3.16 kg/m²) completed three visits to the laboratory. In visit 1, anthropometry, blood pressure and peak running velocity on the treadmill were measured. In visits 2 and 3, participants were randomly assigned to HIIE or LI-AE-BFR, both in treadmill. HIIE consisted of 10 one-minute stimuli at 80% of peak running velocity interspersed with one-minute of passive recovery. LI-AE-BFR consisted of 20-minutes of continuous walking at 40% of peak running velocity with bilateral cuffs inflated to 50% of arterial occlusion pressure. BL and maximum isometric voluntary contraction (MIVC - fatigue measure) were measured pre- and immediately post-exercise. HR, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and rating of perceived pain (RPP) were recorded after each stimulus in HIIE and every two minutes in LI-AE-BFR. Affective response to the session, pleasure, and future intention to exercise (FIE) were assessed 10 minutes after the intervention ended. Increases in BL concentrations were greater in HIIE (p = 0.028; r = 0.51). No effects time or condition were reported for MIVC. HR was higher in HIIE at all analyzed time points (p < 0.001; d = 3.1 to 5.2). RPE did not differ between conditions (p > 0.05), while average session RPP was higher in LI-AE-BFR (p = 0.036; r = 0.46). Affective positive response (p = 0.019; d = 0.9) and FIE (p = 0.013; d = 0.97) were significantly higher in HIIE. Therefore, HIIE elicited higher physiological stress, positive affective response, and intention to engage in future exercise bouts compared to LI-AE-BFR.

Body position and cuff size influence lower limb arterial occlusion pressure and its predictors: implications for standardizing the pressure applied in training with blood flow restriction.

Background: Arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) is a relevant measurement for individualized prescription of exercise with blood flow restriction (BFRE). Therefore, it is important to consider factors that may influence this measure. Purpose: This study aimed to compare lower limb AOP (LL-AOP) measured with 11 cm (medium) and 18 cm (large) cuffs, in different body positions, and explore the predictors for each of the LL-AOP measurements performed. This information may be useful for future studies that seek to develop approaches to improve the standardization of pressure adopted in BFRE, including proposals for equations to estimate LL-AOP. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Fifty-one healthy volunteers (males, n = 25, females, n = 26; Age: 18-40 years old) underwent measurement of thigh circumference (TC), brachial blood pressure, followed by assessments of LL-AOP with medium and large cuffs in positions supine, sitting and standing positions. Results: The large cuff required less external pressure (mmHg) to elicit arterial occlusion in all three-body positions when compared to the medium cuff (p < 0.001). The LL-AOP was significantly lower in the supine position, regardless of the cuff used (p < 0.001). Systolic blood pressure was the main predictor of LL-AOP in the large cuff, while TC was the main predictor of LL-AOP with the medium cuff. Body position influenced strength of the LL-AOP predictors. Conclusion: Our results indicate that LL-AOP and its predictors are substantially influenced by body position and cuff width. Therefore, these variables should be considered when standardizing the pressure prescribed in BFRE.

Impact of social isolation on the level of physical activity in young Brazilian athletes caused by COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Social detachment to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 pandemics in the year 2020 can significantly contribute to the physical inactivity of citizens worldwide. The study aimed to analyze the level of physical activity by identifying the training methods used during the social isolation resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Sixty-eight Brazilian athletes (both sexes, 14.7±1.68 years) answered and adapted the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (I-PAQ) through an online platform. Participants were asked to report their level of physical activity before and during the period of social distance. RESULTS: According to our results, 67.7% of the interviewed athletes said they were able to adapt their sports training to the isolation environment under the guidance of a distance physical education professional. Only 4.38% of the sample was not training under such supervision and, therefore, inactive. Among the activities performed in the isolation environment, calisthenics was the primary practice (effect size: ƒ2=0.50, P<0.0001) and the sport practiced at home was the secondary practice (effect size: ƒ2=0.27, P=0.004). During the pandemic, the training hours of athletes reduced significantly from ~3h to ~1h per day (effect size: 1.74, P<0.0001), as well as the perceived intensity decreased from "high" to "moderate" (effect size: 1.38, P<0.0001). The weekly training frequency decreased from ~6 to 7 days to ~3 to 5 days (effect size: 0.40, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the social distance and the reduced pace of training, the young Brazilian athletes analyzed managed to remain physically active during the COVID-19 pandemic.