Acute resistance exercise with blood flow restriction effects on heart rate, double product, oxygen saturation and perceived exertion.

The aim of this study was to compare the acute effect of resistance exercise (RE) with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) on heart rate (HR), double product (DP), oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE). Twenty-four men (21·79 ± 3·21 years) performed three experimental protocols in a random order (crossover): (i) high-intensity RE at 80% of 1RM (HI), (ii) low-intensity RE at 20% of 1RM (LI) and (iii) low-intensity RE at 20% of 1RM combined with partial blood flow restriction (LI+BFR). HR, blood pressure, SpO2 and RPE were assessed. The data were analysed using repeated measures analysis of variance and the Wilcoxon test for RPE. The results indicated that all protocols significantly increased HR, both immediately postexercise and during the subsequent 60 min (P<0·05), and postexercise DP (P<0·05), but there were no differences between protocols. The protocols of LI and LI+BFR reduced postexercise SpO2 (P = 0·033, P = 0·007), and the LI+BFR protocol presented a perception of greater exertion in the lower limbs compared with HI (P = 0·022). We conclude that RE performed at low intensity combined with BFR seems to reduce the SpO2 after exercise and increase HR and DP while maintaining a perception of greater exertion on the lower limbs.

Hypotensive effects and performance responses between different resistance training intensities and exercise orders in apparently health women.

To compare the hypotensive effect and performance responses between different resistance training intensities and different exercise orders in apparently healthy women, thirteen apparently healthy women performed four resistance training sessions in randomized order. One group performed the resistance training exercises with 60% of 1RM (SeqA60%): leg press (LG), chest press (CP), leg extension (LE), lat pull down (PD), leg curl (LC) and biceps curl (BC). Another group performed the resistance training exercises with 80% of 1RM (SeqA80%) with the same exercise order. Two other groups performed the resistance training exercises with 60% (SeqB60%) and 80% of 1RM (SeqB80%), however, in another sequence of exercises: CP, PD, BC or LG, LE, LC. The blood pressure was measured before, and at every 15 min until 60 min postexercise. The different intensities and different exercise orders resulted in a significant hypotensive effect in systolic and diastolic blood pressures that remained until 15 min. In addition, significant reductions in systolic blood pressure were observed at 30 min for SeqA in both intensities and for SeqB with intensities of 80% of 1RM. However, there was no significant difference between intensities and different prescription orders (P>0·05). Although the current study showed significant decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressures after different resistance training sessions, the manipulation of intensity and exercise sequence, such as those used in the present study, was not able to generate significant changes in the duration and magnitude of hypotensive effect.

Chronic effects of different resistance training exercise orders on flexibility in elite judo athletes.

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of twelve weeks of resistance training with different exercise orders (upper limbs and lower limbs vs. lower limbs and upper limbs) on flexibility levels in elite judo athletes. Thirty-nine male athletes were randomly divided into 3 groups as follows: G1 (n = 13), G2 (n = 13), and CG (n = 13). The flexibility was assessed on 8 joint movements: shoulder flexion and shoulder extension, shoulder abduction and shoulder adduction, trunk flexion and trunk extension, and hip flexion and hip extension. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (time [pre-experimental vs. post-experimental] × group [G1 vs. G2 vs. CG]) were used to compare the differences between pre- and post-test situations and the differences among groups. The results from the within-group (pre vs. post) comparisons demonstrated significant increases (p < 0.05) in the range of motion of 3.93 and 5.96% for G1 and G2 training groups, respectively, in all joints. No significant changes (p > 0.05) were observed for the CG. The results from the between-group comparisons demonstrated no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the range of motion between G1post vs. G2post (1.15%). Although both exercise orders (from upper to lower limbs and from lower to upper limbs) increased flexibility, no significant variations were observed between the different exercise orders. Nevertheless, these findings demonstrate that flexibility gains could be obtained with a resistance training program, and thus, more time can be devoted to sports-specific judo training.