Acute Effects of Sprint Interval Training and Blood Flow Restriction on Neuromuscular and Muscle Function.

BFR) applied during sprint interval training (SIT) on performance and neuromuscular function. METHODS: Fifteen men completed a randomized bout of SIT with CBFR, IBFR, and without BFR (No-BFR), consisting of 2, 30-s maximal sprints on a cycle ergometer with a resistance of 7.5% of body mass. Concentric peak torque (CPT), maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) torque, and muscle thickness (MT) were measured before and after SIT, including surface electromyography (sEMG) recorded during the strength assessments. Peak and mean revolutions per minute (RPM) were measured during SIT and power output was examined relative to physical working capacity at the fatigue threshold (PWCFT). RESULTS: CPT and MVIC torque decreased from pre-SIT (220.3±47.6 Nm and 355.1±72.5 Nm, respectively) to post-SIT (147.9±27.7 Nm and 252.2±45.5 Nm, respectively, all P<0.05), while MT increased (1.77±0.31 cm to 1.96±0.30 cm). sEMG mean power frequency decreased during CPT (-12.8±10.5%) and MVIC (-8.7±10.2%) muscle actions. %PWCFT was greater during No-BFR (414.2±121.9%) than CBFR (375.9±121.9%). CONCLUSION: SIT with or without BFR induced comparable alterations in neuromuscular fatigue and sprint performance across all conditions, without affecting neuromuscular function.

Blood flow restriction attenuates surface mechanomyography lateral and longitudinal, but not transverse oscillations during fatiguing exercise.

Objective. Surface mechanomyography (sMMG) can measure oscillations of the activated muscle fibers in three axes (i.e.X,Y, andZ-axes) and has been used to describe motor unit activation patterns (X-axis). The application of blood flow restriction (BFR) is common in exercise studies, but the cuff may restrict muscle fiber oscillations. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to examine the acute effects of submaximal, fatiguing exercise with and without BFR on sMMG amplitude in theX,Y, andZ-axes among female participants.Approach. Sixteen females (21 ± 1 years) performed two separate exercise bouts to volitional exhaustion that consisted of unilateral, submaximal (50% maximal voluntary isometric contraction [MVIC]) intermittent, isometric, leg extensions with and without BFR. sMMG was recorded and examined across percent time to exhaustion (%TTE) in 20% increments. Separate 2-way repeated measures ANOVA models were constructed: (condition [BFR, non-BFR]) × (time [20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% TTE]) to examine absolute (m·s-2) and normalized (% of pretest MVIC) sMMG amplitude in theX-(sMMG-X),Y-(sMMG-Y), andZ-(sMMG-Z) axes.Main results. The absolute sMMG-X amplitude responses were attenuated with the application of BFR (mean ± SD = 0.236 ± 0.138 m·s-2) relative to non-BFR (0.366 ± 0.199 m·s-2, collapsed across time) and for sMMG-Y amplitude at 60%-100% of TTE (BFR range = 0.213-0.232 m·s-2versus non-BFR = 0.313-0.445 m·s-2). Normalizing sMMG to pretest MVIC removed most, but not all the attenuation which was still evident for sMMG-Y amplitude at 100% of TTE between BFR (72.9 ± 47.2%) and non-BFR (98.9 ± 53.1%). Interestingly, sMMG-Z amplitude was not affected by the application of BFR and progressively decreased across %TTE (0.332 ± 0.167 m·s-2to 0.219 ± 0.104 m·s-2, collapsed across condition.)Significance. The application of BFR attenuated sMMG-X and sMMG-Y amplitude, although normalizing sMMG removed most of this attenuation. Unlike theXandY-axes, sMMG-Z amplitude was not affected by BFR and progressively decreased across each exercise bout potentially tracking the development of muscle fatigue.

Acute effects of low load blood flow restricted and non restricted exercise on muscle excitation, neuromuscular efficiency, and average torque.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the acute effects of low-load blood flow restriction (LLBFR) and low-load (LL) resistance exercise on muscle excitation, neuromuscular efficiency, and average torque. METHODS: Eleven men (age±SD=22±3yrs) randomly performed LLBFR and LL that consisted of 30 unilateral leg extensions at 30% of one-repetition maximum while surface electromyography (sEMG) and torque were simultaneously assessed. Polynomial regression analyses and slope comparisons were performed to examine patterns of responses and rates of change. RESULTS: sEMG amplitude increased for LLBFR (9 of 11) and LL (8 of 11) and between composite responses (R2=0.939-0.981). For LLBFR, sEMG amplitude increased to a greater extent for 5 of the 11 individual and for the composite responses. Similarly, neuromuscular efficiency decreased for LLBFR (8 of 11) and LL (5 of 11) as well as the composite responses r2=0.902-0.929, but the decrease was larger for LLBFR than LL for the individual (4 of 11) responses. For average submaximal concentric torque, there were individual increases, decreases, and no changes for the composite responses (R2=0.198-0.325). CONCLUSION: LLBFR elicited greater fatigue-induced increases in muscle excitation and decreases in neuromuscular efficiency than LL, but neither LLBFR nor LL affected average submaximal concentric torque.

Neuromuscular Responses to Failure vs Non-Failure During Blood Flow Restriction Training in Untrained Females.

Applying blood flow restriction (BFR) during resistance exercise is a potent stimulus of muscular adaption, but there is little direct comparison of its effect on neuromuscular function. The purpose of this investigation was to compare surface electromyography amplitude and frequency responses during a 75 (1 × 30, 3 × 15) repetition bout (BFR-75) of BFR to 4 sets to failure (BFR-F). Twelve women (mean ± SD age = 22 ± 4 years; body mass = 72 ± 14.4 kg; height = 162.1 ± 4.0 cm) volunteered for the investigation. One leg was randomly assigned to complete BFR-75 and the other to BFR-F. Each leg performed isokinetic, unilateral, concentric-eccentric, leg extension at 30% of maximal strength while surface electromyographic (sEMG) data was recorded. More repetitions (p = 0.006) were completed during set 2 for BFR-F (21.2 ± 7.4) than BFR-75 (14.7 ± 1.2), but there were no other between condition differences for set 1 (29.8 ± 0.9 vs 28.9 ± 10.1), set 3 (14.4 ± 1.4 vs 17.1 ± 6.9), or set 4 (14.8 ± 0.9 vs 16.3 ± 7.0). Collapsed across condition, normalized sEMG amplitude increased (p = 0.014, 132.66 ± 14.03% to 208.21 ± 24.82%) across the first three sets of exercise then plateaued, while normalized sEMG frequency decreased (p = 0.342, 103.07 ± 3.89% to 83.73 ± 4.47%) across the first two sets then plateaued. The present findings indicated that BFR-75 and BFR-F elicited similar acute neuromuscular fatigue responses. The plateau in amplitude and frequency suggested that maximal motor unit excitation and metabolic buildup may be maximized after two to three sets of BFR-75 and BFR-F.

Greater neuromuscular fatigue following low-load blood flow restriction than non-blood flow restriction resistance exercise among recreationally active men.

The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of low-load blood flow restriction (LLBFR) and low-load non-BFR (LL) on neuromuscular function after a bout of standardized fatiguing leg extension muscle actions. Fourteen men (mean age ± SD = 23 ± 4 yr) volunteered to participate in this investigation and randomly performed LLBFR and LL on separate days. Resistance exercise consisted of 75 isotonic unilateral leg extension muscle actions performed at 30% of one-repetition maximum. Before (pretest) and after (posttest) performance of each bout of exercise, strength and neural assessments were determined. There were no pretest to posttest differences between LLBFR and LL for maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) torque or V wave/M wave responses (muscle compound action potentials assessed during a superimposed MVIC muscle action), which exhibited decreases (collapsed across condition) of 41.2% and 26.2%, respectively. There were pretest to posttest decreases in peak twitch torque (36.0%) and surface electromyography amplitude (sEMG) (29.5%) for LLBFR but not LL and larger decreases in voluntary activation for LLBFR (11.3%) than for LL (4.5%). These findings suggested that LLBFR elicited greater fatigue-induced decreases in several indexes of neuromuscular function relative to LL. Despite this, both LLBFR and LL resulted in similar decrements in performance as assessed by maximal strength.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The application of blood flow restriction induces greater acute neuromuscular fatigue relative to nonrestricted conditions. Resistance exercise with blood flow restriction elicited a greater reduction in twitch responses. These neuromuscular differences might explain the more favorable adaptations achieved with blood flow restriction that are likely a function of metabolic stress and subsequent changes in efferent neural drive.