Blood flow restriction training on physical parameters in elite male canoe athletes.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effect blood flow restriction (BFR) exercises on muscle size, strength and athletic performance in elite canoe athletes aged 18 to 25 years. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial. The participants were divided into 2 groups: the intervention group (INT-gr) (n = 17, age: 18.59 ± 0.71 years) and the control group (CONT-gr) (n = 16, age: 18.81 ± 1.11 years). Anthropometric measurements, muscle size measured by ultrasound (US), strength measurements with an isokinetic dynamometer, and ergometer performance with an indoor ergometer were conducted before and after the exercise program. Knee flexion and extension and leg press one-repetition maximum (1 RM) tests were performed to determine the participants' training program. The INT-gr performed 1 RM 30% resistance training + BFR for 8 weeks, while the CONT-gr performed 1 RM 30% resistance training (RT) without BFR with their routine training program. US was used to measure the cross sectional area (CSA) and thickness of the quadriceps femoris (QF) and Hamstring (H) muscles in the pre-post design, and the isokinetic dynamometer was used to measure the strength of bilateral 60˚/s and 300˚/s peak torque (PT) values of the QF and H. Sports performance was tested on an indoor ergometer at distances of 200, 500, and 1000 m. RESULTS: The changes in bilateral rectus femoris (RF) CSA and VL thickness measurements in the INT-gr were significant (P < .05). Ergometer performance measurements showed a significant improvement over CONT-gr at all distances (P < .05). In terms of strength scores measured by the isokinetic dynamometer, the right QF and H 300˚/s and the left QF 60˚/s PT values were significantly in favor of INT-gr. CONCLUSION: BFR exercises are effective to increase strength, muscle size, and ergometer performance in elite canoe athletes.

Cause of non-specific low back pain in women: pelvic floor muscle weakness.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between pelvic floor muscle (PFM) strength and low back pain (LBP) in women with and without non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) with similar demographic and physical characteristics. METHODS: The study included 40 women (35.73±6.74 years) with NSLBP (with LBP group) and 32 women (34.59±5.93) without LBP (without LBP group). PFM strength with a perineometer, pain intensity with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), quality of life with the Short Form-36 (SF-36), and perceptions of LBP and related disability with the Rolland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) were evaluated. RESULTS: There was no difference between the groups in terms of age, BMI, number of births (0, 1, and 2 births) and mode of delivery (vaginal/cesarean section) (p>0.05). There was a statistical difference between the groups in all parameters except SF-36 Emotional Role Limitation subscale (p<0.05). We found PFM strength an independent predictor of the RMDQ score, and RMDQ and VAS scores as independent predictors of SF-36 physical and mental components (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased PFM strength in women causes non-specific mechanical low back pain and disability independent of age, BMI, and the number and type of delivery. Decreased PFM strength is a predictor of disability. Disability and pain are also independent predictors of decreased quality of life. PFM measurement should be prioritized when evaluating women with NSLBP. PFM strength may be a determinant of LBP.