TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparison of variability between absolute and relative blood flow restriction pressures
AU - Stanford, Daphney M.
AU - Chatlaong, Matthew A.
AU - Miller, William M.
AU - Mouser, J. Grant
AU - Dankel, Scott J.
AU - Jessee, Matthew B.
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank all the participants for completing this study and the University of Mississippi, Office of Research and Sponsored Programs, the Graduate School, and the Graduate Student Council for funding this study through a Graduate Student Research Grant.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Scandinavian Society of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Introduction: Recommendations are that blood flow restriction (BFR) be applied relative to arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) to provide a similar stimulus. Purpose: Compare variability of the change in blood flow, shear rate and discomfort between recommended relative pressures and an absolute pressure. Methods: During one visit, brachial arterial blood flow was measured in 91 participants using pulse-wave Doppler ultrasonography. After 5-min seated rest, AOP was measured. Following another 5-min rest, blood flow and discomfort were assessed twice before cuff inflation as controls (C1 and C2), then again with a cuff inflated to each BFR pressure (all measures separated by 1-min). Change scores from C1 to all subsequent measures were calculated (i.e., C2-C1; 40% AOP-C1; 80% AOP-C1; 100 mmHg-C1). Variability of the changes were compared via pairwise modified Pitman–Morgan tests (α = 0.008). Results: Variance (95% CI) of the change for blood flow (ml/min), shear rate (1/s), and discomfort (AU) had similar trends. C2-C1 differed from all conditions (all p < 0.001), 40% AOP-C1 differed from 80% AOP-C1 and 100 mmHg-C1 (all p < 0.001), which did not differ (both p ≥ 0.117). Blood flow: C2-C1 = 469.79 (357.90, 644.07), 40% AOP-C1 = 1263.18 (962.34, 1731.80), 80% AOP-C1 = 1752.90 (1335.42, 2403.18), 100 mmHg-C1 = 1603.18 (1221.36, 2197.92); shear rate: C2-C1 = 6248.24 (4760.10, 8566.15), 40% AOP-C1 = 14 625.30 (11 142.06, 20 050.95), 80% AOP-C1 = 22 064.02 (16 809.13, 30 249.27), 100 mmHg-C1 = 20 778.76 (15 829.98, 28 487.21); discomfort: C2-C1 = 0.07 (0.05, 0.08), 40% AOP-C1 = 2.03 (1.55, 2.78), 80% AOP-C1 = 4.26 (3.25, 5.84), 100 mmHg-C1 = 4.50 (3.43, 6.17). Conclusion: Contrary to previous suggestions, applying relative pressures does not necessarily guarantee a similar stimulus. It seems that higher pressures produce more variable changes even if the external pressure applied is made relative to each individual.
AB - Introduction: Recommendations are that blood flow restriction (BFR) be applied relative to arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) to provide a similar stimulus. Purpose: Compare variability of the change in blood flow, shear rate and discomfort between recommended relative pressures and an absolute pressure. Methods: During one visit, brachial arterial blood flow was measured in 91 participants using pulse-wave Doppler ultrasonography. After 5-min seated rest, AOP was measured. Following another 5-min rest, blood flow and discomfort were assessed twice before cuff inflation as controls (C1 and C2), then again with a cuff inflated to each BFR pressure (all measures separated by 1-min). Change scores from C1 to all subsequent measures were calculated (i.e., C2-C1; 40% AOP-C1; 80% AOP-C1; 100 mmHg-C1). Variability of the changes were compared via pairwise modified Pitman–Morgan tests (α = 0.008). Results: Variance (95% CI) of the change for blood flow (ml/min), shear rate (1/s), and discomfort (AU) had similar trends. C2-C1 differed from all conditions (all p < 0.001), 40% AOP-C1 differed from 80% AOP-C1 and 100 mmHg-C1 (all p < 0.001), which did not differ (both p ≥ 0.117). Blood flow: C2-C1 = 469.79 (357.90, 644.07), 40% AOP-C1 = 1263.18 (962.34, 1731.80), 80% AOP-C1 = 1752.90 (1335.42, 2403.18), 100 mmHg-C1 = 1603.18 (1221.36, 2197.92); shear rate: C2-C1 = 6248.24 (4760.10, 8566.15), 40% AOP-C1 = 14 625.30 (11 142.06, 20 050.95), 80% AOP-C1 = 22 064.02 (16 809.13, 30 249.27), 100 mmHg-C1 = 20 778.76 (15 829.98, 28 487.21); discomfort: C2-C1 = 0.07 (0.05, 0.08), 40% AOP-C1 = 2.03 (1.55, 2.78), 80% AOP-C1 = 4.26 (3.25, 5.84), 100 mmHg-C1 = 4.50 (3.43, 6.17). Conclusion: Contrary to previous suggestions, applying relative pressures does not necessarily guarantee a similar stimulus. It seems that higher pressures produce more variable changes even if the external pressure applied is made relative to each individual.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128567086&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85128567086&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/cpf.12757
DO - 10.1111/cpf.12757
M3 - Article
C2 - 35396926
AN - SCOPUS:85128567086
JO - Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging
JF - Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging
SN - 1475-0961
ER -