Cargando…
Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to explore how individuals in the United States of America applied BFR/KAATSU devices and administered BFR/KAATSU training. In addition, the study sought to examine safety topics related to BFR/KAATSU training. Methods: The study was completed using survey resea...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9298746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35874549 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.882472 |
_version_ | 1784750780906995712 |
---|---|
author | Cuffe, Molly Novak, Joel Saithna, Adnan Strohmeyer, H. Scott Slaven, Emily |
author_facet | Cuffe, Molly Novak, Joel Saithna, Adnan Strohmeyer, H. Scott Slaven, Emily |
author_sort | Cuffe, Molly |
collection | PubMed |
description | Purpose: The purpose of the study was to explore how individuals in the United States of America applied BFR/KAATSU devices and administered BFR/KAATSU training. In addition, the study sought to examine safety topics related to BFR/KAATSU training. Methods: The study was completed using survey research. Subjects were recruited through Facebook, email, and word of mouth. The survey was developed, piloted, and finally deployed March 22, 2021-April 21, 2021. Results: In total, 148 consented to the research; 108 completed the survey, and of those 108, 70 indicated current use with BFR/KAATSU equipment. Professions represented included athletic training, personal training, physical therapy, and strength and conditioning. Among those currently using BFR/KAATSU training (n = 70), the following results were found. The most common devices used were inflatable devices (n = 43, 61.4%). Education completed prior to device administration was formal (n = 39, 55.7%) and/or self-directed (n = 37, 52.9%). Barriers were faced by 29 (41.4%) when trying to enact training. Techniques and parameters varied during application. Screening processes were used (n = 50, 71.4%) prior to training. The devices were used to determine restrictive pressure (n = 31, 44.3%), and a supine position was used most when determining initial restrictive pressure (n = 33, 47.1%). For subsequent restrictive pressure measurements, respondents repeated the same method used initially (n = 38, 54.3%). Workload was often defined as the length of time under tension/load (n = 22, 31.4%) and exercise was directly supervised (n = 52, 74.3%). Adverse effects included bruising, lightheadedness, and cramping (n = 15, 21.4%). The devices have also been applied on those with pathology (n = 16, 22.9%). Conclusion: Those using blood flow restriction/KAATSU devices came from several professions and used an assortment of devices for BFR/KAATSU training. Individuals applied devices using a variety of parameters on populations for which efficacy has and has not been well defined. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9298746 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92987462022-07-21 Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction Cuffe, Molly Novak, Joel Saithna, Adnan Strohmeyer, H. Scott Slaven, Emily Front Physiol Physiology Purpose: The purpose of the study was to explore how individuals in the United States of America applied BFR/KAATSU devices and administered BFR/KAATSU training. In addition, the study sought to examine safety topics related to BFR/KAATSU training. Methods: The study was completed using survey research. Subjects were recruited through Facebook, email, and word of mouth. The survey was developed, piloted, and finally deployed March 22, 2021-April 21, 2021. Results: In total, 148 consented to the research; 108 completed the survey, and of those 108, 70 indicated current use with BFR/KAATSU equipment. Professions represented included athletic training, personal training, physical therapy, and strength and conditioning. Among those currently using BFR/KAATSU training (n = 70), the following results were found. The most common devices used were inflatable devices (n = 43, 61.4%). Education completed prior to device administration was formal (n = 39, 55.7%) and/or self-directed (n = 37, 52.9%). Barriers were faced by 29 (41.4%) when trying to enact training. Techniques and parameters varied during application. Screening processes were used (n = 50, 71.4%) prior to training. The devices were used to determine restrictive pressure (n = 31, 44.3%), and a supine position was used most when determining initial restrictive pressure (n = 33, 47.1%). For subsequent restrictive pressure measurements, respondents repeated the same method used initially (n = 38, 54.3%). Workload was often defined as the length of time under tension/load (n = 22, 31.4%) and exercise was directly supervised (n = 52, 74.3%). Adverse effects included bruising, lightheadedness, and cramping (n = 15, 21.4%). The devices have also been applied on those with pathology (n = 16, 22.9%). Conclusion: Those using blood flow restriction/KAATSU devices came from several professions and used an assortment of devices for BFR/KAATSU training. Individuals applied devices using a variety of parameters on populations for which efficacy has and has not been well defined. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9298746/ /pubmed/35874549 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.882472 Text en Copyright © 2022 Cuffe, Novak, Saithna, Strohmeyer and Slaven. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Physiology Cuffe, Molly Novak, Joel Saithna, Adnan Strohmeyer, H. Scott Slaven, Emily Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title | Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title_full | Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title_fullStr | Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title_full_unstemmed | Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title_short | Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction |
title_sort | current trends in blood flow restriction |
topic | Physiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9298746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35874549 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.882472 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cuffemolly currenttrendsinbloodflowrestriction AT novakjoel currenttrendsinbloodflowrestriction AT saithnaadnan currenttrendsinbloodflowrestriction AT strohmeyerhscott currenttrendsinbloodflowrestriction AT slavenemily currenttrendsinbloodflowrestriction |