No Cover Image

Journal article 147 views 23 downloads

Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures / Paul Head, Mark Waldron, Nicola Theis, Stephen David Patterson

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, Volume: 30, Issue: 3, Pages: 375 - 383

Swansea University Author: Mark Waldron

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1123/jsr.2019-0505

Abstract

Context: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to improve muscular strength and size better than NMES alone. However, previous studies used varied methodologies not recommended by previous NMES or BFR research. Objective: The present st...

Full description

Published in: Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
ISSN: 1056-6716 1543-3072
Published: Human Kinetics 2021
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa54112
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2020-05-01T19:38:43Z
last_indexed 2021-04-30T03:17:59Z
id cronfa54112
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2021-04-29T17:47:51.1593872</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>54112</id><entry>2020-05-01</entry><title>Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>70db7c6c54d46f5e70b39e5ae0a056fa</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-2720-4615</ORCID><firstname>Mark</firstname><surname>Waldron</surname><name>Mark Waldron</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2020-05-01</date><deptcode>STSC</deptcode><abstract>Context: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to improve muscular strength and size better than NMES alone. However, previous studies used varied methodologies not recommended by previous NMES or BFR research. Objective: The present study investigated the acute effects of NMES combined with varying degrees of BFR using research-recommended procedures to enhance understanding and the clinical applicability of this combination. Design: Randomized crossover. Setting: Physiology laboratory. Participants: A total of 20 healthy adults (age 27 [4] y; height 177 [8] cm; body mass 77 [13] kg). Interventions: Six sessions separated by at least 7 days. The first 2 visits served as familiarization, with the experimental conditions performed in the final 4 sessions: NMES alone, NMES 40% BFR, NMES 60% BFR, and NMES 80% BFR. Main Outcome Measures: Maximal voluntary isometric contraction, muscle thickness, blood pressure, heart rate, rating of perceived exertion, and pain were all recorded before and after each condition. Results: The NMES 80% BFR caused greater maximal voluntary isometric contraction decline than any other condition (&#x2212;38.9 [22.3] N&#xB7;m, P&#x2009;&lt;&#x2009;.01). Vastus medialis and vastus lateralis muscle thickness acutely increased after all experimental conditions (P&#x2009;&lt;&#x2009;.05). Pain and ratings of perceived exertion were higher after NMES 80% BFR compared with all other experimental conditions (P&#x2009;&lt;&#x2009;.05). No cardiovascular effects were observed between conditions. Conclusion: The NMES combined with 80% BFR caused greater acute force decrement than the other conditions. However, greater perceptual ratings of pain and ratings of perceived exertion were observed with NMES 80% BFR. These acute observations must be investigated during chronic interventions to corroborate any relationship to changes in muscle strength and size in clinical populations.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Journal of Sport Rehabilitation</journal><volume>30</volume><journalNumber>3</journalNumber><paginationStart>375</paginationStart><paginationEnd>383</paginationEnd><publisher>Human Kinetics</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>1056-6716</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1543-3072</issnElectronic><keywords/><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>3</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2021</publishedYear><publishedDate>2021-03-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1123/jsr.2019-0505</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Sport and Exercise Sciences</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>STSC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2021-04-29T17:47:51.1593872</lastEdited><Created>2020-05-01T15:26:08.3539949</Created><path><level id="1">College of Engineering</level><level id="2">Sports Science</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Paul</firstname><surname>Head</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Mark</firstname><surname>Waldron</surname><orcid>0000-0002-2720-4615</orcid><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Nicola</firstname><surname>Theis</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Stephen David</firstname><surname>Patterson</surname><order>4</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>54112__17173__3129dbc2d2aa423188cdd93bfc529dcf.pdf</filename><originalFilename>54112.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2020-05-01T15:29:39.6221636</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>854178</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2021-04-29T17:47:51.1593872 v2 54112 2020-05-01 Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures 70db7c6c54d46f5e70b39e5ae0a056fa 0000-0002-2720-4615 Mark Waldron Mark Waldron true false 2020-05-01 STSC Context: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to improve muscular strength and size better than NMES alone. However, previous studies used varied methodologies not recommended by previous NMES or BFR research. Objective: The present study investigated the acute effects of NMES combined with varying degrees of BFR using research-recommended procedures to enhance understanding and the clinical applicability of this combination. Design: Randomized crossover. Setting: Physiology laboratory. Participants: A total of 20 healthy adults (age 27 [4] y; height 177 [8] cm; body mass 77 [13] kg). Interventions: Six sessions separated by at least 7 days. The first 2 visits served as familiarization, with the experimental conditions performed in the final 4 sessions: NMES alone, NMES 40% BFR, NMES 60% BFR, and NMES 80% BFR. Main Outcome Measures: Maximal voluntary isometric contraction, muscle thickness, blood pressure, heart rate, rating of perceived exertion, and pain were all recorded before and after each condition. Results: The NMES 80% BFR caused greater maximal voluntary isometric contraction decline than any other condition (−38.9 [22.3] N·m, P < .01). Vastus medialis and vastus lateralis muscle thickness acutely increased after all experimental conditions (P < .05). Pain and ratings of perceived exertion were higher after NMES 80% BFR compared with all other experimental conditions (P < .05). No cardiovascular effects were observed between conditions. Conclusion: The NMES combined with 80% BFR caused greater acute force decrement than the other conditions. However, greater perceptual ratings of pain and ratings of perceived exertion were observed with NMES 80% BFR. These acute observations must be investigated during chronic interventions to corroborate any relationship to changes in muscle strength and size in clinical populations. Journal Article Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 30 3 375 383 Human Kinetics 1056-6716 1543-3072 1 3 2021 2021-03-01 10.1123/jsr.2019-0505 COLLEGE NANME Sport and Exercise Sciences COLLEGE CODE STSC Swansea University 2021-04-29T17:47:51.1593872 2020-05-01T15:26:08.3539949 College of Engineering Sports Science Paul Head 1 Mark Waldron 0000-0002-2720-4615 2 Nicola Theis 3 Stephen David Patterson 4 54112__17173__3129dbc2d2aa423188cdd93bfc529dcf.pdf 54112.pdf 2020-05-01T15:29:39.6221636 Output 854178 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true true eng
title Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
spellingShingle Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
Mark, Waldron
title_short Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
title_full Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
title_fullStr Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
title_full_unstemmed Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
title_sort Acute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) With Blood Flow Restriction: The Effect of Restriction Pressures
author_id_str_mv 70db7c6c54d46f5e70b39e5ae0a056fa
author_id_fullname_str_mv 70db7c6c54d46f5e70b39e5ae0a056fa_***_Mark, Waldron
author Mark, Waldron
author2 Paul Head
Mark Waldron
Nicola Theis
Stephen David Patterson
format Journal article
container_title Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
container_volume 30
container_issue 3
container_start_page 375
publishDate 2021
institution Swansea University
issn 1056-6716
1543-3072
doi_str_mv 10.1123/jsr.2019-0505
publisher Human Kinetics
college_str College of Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id collegeofengineering
hierarchy_top_title College of Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id collegeofengineering
hierarchy_parent_title College of Engineering
department_str Sports Science{{{_:::_}}}College of Engineering{{{_:::_}}}Sports Science
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Context: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to improve muscular strength and size better than NMES alone. However, previous studies used varied methodologies not recommended by previous NMES or BFR research. Objective: The present study investigated the acute effects of NMES combined with varying degrees of BFR using research-recommended procedures to enhance understanding and the clinical applicability of this combination. Design: Randomized crossover. Setting: Physiology laboratory. Participants: A total of 20 healthy adults (age 27 [4] y; height 177 [8] cm; body mass 77 [13] kg). Interventions: Six sessions separated by at least 7 days. The first 2 visits served as familiarization, with the experimental conditions performed in the final 4 sessions: NMES alone, NMES 40% BFR, NMES 60% BFR, and NMES 80% BFR. Main Outcome Measures: Maximal voluntary isometric contraction, muscle thickness, blood pressure, heart rate, rating of perceived exertion, and pain were all recorded before and after each condition. Results: The NMES 80% BFR caused greater maximal voluntary isometric contraction decline than any other condition (−38.9 [22.3] N·m, P < .01). Vastus medialis and vastus lateralis muscle thickness acutely increased after all experimental conditions (P < .05). Pain and ratings of perceived exertion were higher after NMES 80% BFR compared with all other experimental conditions (P < .05). No cardiovascular effects were observed between conditions. Conclusion: The NMES combined with 80% BFR caused greater acute force decrement than the other conditions. However, greater perceptual ratings of pain and ratings of perceived exertion were observed with NMES 80% BFR. These acute observations must be investigated during chronic interventions to corroborate any relationship to changes in muscle strength and size in clinical populations.
published_date 2021-03-01T04:11:39Z
_version_ 1717915510012641280
score 10.846044