Getting the best GRIP on blood pressure control: Investigating a cost-effective isometric handgrip alternative.

OBJECTIVES: The World Health Organization emphasises the need for cost-effective alternative methods to lower blood pressure (BP). Endorsed nationally in HTN guidelines, isometric handgrip (IHG) training is an alternative method of BP control. The purpose of this study was to compare the BP, heart rate (HR) and rates of perceived exertion (RPE) responses between a bout of IHG training performed using the traditional computerized device and a more affordable, inflatable stress ball. METHODS: Twenty healthy adults performed one bout (4, 2-min isometric contractions, with 1-min rests between each contraction at 30% maximal voluntary contraction) of IHG training using the traditional computerized device, and one bout with the inflatable stress ball. BP, HR, and RPE were recorded. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between devices were observed with HR, BP, and RPE (p < 0.05). However, average RPE for both devices ranged between 5 and 6 indicating that participants were rating 30% of their MVC, consistent with previous work. DISCUSSION: The similar cardiovascular and psychophysical responses provide support for the potential use of this low individual- and provider-burden, cost-efficient IHG device, and lay the foundation for a future training study to test the hypothesis of benefit.

Blood pressure-lowering efficacy of a 6-week multi-modal isometric exercise intervention.

Isometric exercise training (IET) is an effective method for reducing resting blood pressure (BP). To date, no research studies have been conducted using multiple exercises within an IET intervention. Previous research has suggested that varied exercise programmes may have a positive effect on adherence. Therefore, this randomized controlled study aimed to investigate the BP-lowering efficacy of a multi-modal IET (MIET) intervention in healthy young adults. Twenty healthy participants were randomized to an MIET [n = 10; four women; SBP 117.9 ± 6.9 mmHg; DBP 66.3 ± 5.1 mmHg] or control (CON) group (n = 10; five women; SBP, 123.3 ± 10.4 mmHg; DBP, 77.3 ± 6.7 mmHg). The MIET group completed three sessions per week of 4, 2-min isometric contractions, with a 1-min rest between each contraction, for 6 weeks. Resting BP and heart rate (HR) were measured at baseline and post-intervention. Pre-to-post intervention within-group reductions in resting BP were observed (SBP: 5.3 ± 6.1 mmHg, DBP: 3.4 ± 3.7 mmHg, MAP: 4.0 ± 3.9 mmHg, HR: 4.8 ±6 .6 bpm), although clinically relevant (≥2 mmHg), these changes were not statistically significant. Significant (p < 0.05) between-group differences were found between the intervention and control groups, indicating that the MIET intervention has a greater BP-lowering effect compared to control. The clinically relevant post-training reductions in resting BP suggest that MIET may be a promising additional IET method for hypertension prevention. These findings; however, must be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size and the non-clinical cohort.