Salisbury University
Salisbury, Maryland, 21801, United States
NCT Number: NCT05719090
To investigate the acute effects of autoregulated (AR) and non-autoregulated (NAR) BFR exercise on indices of arterial stiffness. AR BFR training devices adjust pressure in the cuff ensuring similar pressure throughout the range of motion when the muscles are contracted (dilatated) and relaxed. NAR BFR training devices do not adjust pressure in the cuff throughout the range of motion when the muscles are contracted and relaxed which cause greater pressures at different points in the range of motion. METHODS: Following a randomized AR or NAR familiarization training session, 20 adults (23±5 years; 7 female) participated in 3 randomized treatment-order sessions with AR-BFR, NAR-BFR, and no- BFR separated by 1-week washout periods. Participants performed 4 sets of dumbbell wall squats to failure using 20% of 1 repetition maximum (1-RM) at 2-second concentric/eccentric cadence. Training limb occlusion pressure (LOP) was set at 60% of supine LOP for both the AT and NAR sessions. Testing before and immediately following the training session included ultrasonography of the carotid artery, applanation tonometry, and blood pressure acquisition. Two-way ANOVAs were used to examine the effects of treatment and the treatment-order interaction on pulse wave velocity (PWV), beta-stiffness index (β-stiff), and arterial compliance (AC). RESULTS: There were no baseline differences in CF- (carotid-femoral) PWV, CR- (carotid-radial) PWV, β-stiff, and AC (all p > 0.05). CF-PWV increased in the NAR-BFR (mean difference = 0.57±1.12 m/s, p = 0.02) and no-BFR (mean difference = 0.63±1.42 m/s, p = 0.03) groups following the exercise session. CR-PWV increased in the no-BFR (mean difference = 0.82±1.5 m/s, p = 0.03) group. And there was an interaction effect in CFPWV between AR-BFR and NAR-BFR (mean difference = 0.70±1.6 m/s, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: These findings show acute AR-BFR training does not influence indices of arterial stiffness while acute NAR-BRF training increases central stiffness.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–40 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Salisbury, Maryland, 21801, United States
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Measure within & between differences in acute vascular compliance from pre- to post-training with autoregulated BFR, nonautoregulated BFR and no BFR conditions.
Time frame: Baseline and 10 minutes after exercise on day 1
A measurement that compares carotid SBP and DBP with carotid systolic and diastole diameters.
Time frame: Baseline and 10 minutes after exercise on day 1
A measurement that records the time difference between the foot of the systolic wave form as it arrives at the carotid and femoral arterial sites. It is measured with an arterial tonometer.
Salisbury University
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT02821780
Arterial Stiffness, Brain Diseases
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07188272
Arterial Stiffness, Cardiovascular Diseases
Minya, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT05781737
Arterial Stiffness, Cardiovascular Diseases
Moscow, Russia
View Trial DetailsNCT03617302
Aging, Arterial Stiffness
Iowa City, Iowa, United States
View Trial Details