IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p16000-d989030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Perceptual, Affective, and Cardiovascular Responses between Resistance Exercise with and without Blood Flow Restriction in Older Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Parkington

    (Physical Activity, Wellness and Public Health Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK
    Lifestyle, Exercise and Nutrition Improvement Research Group, Department of Nursing and Midwifery, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK)

  • Thomas Maden-Wilkinson

    (Physical Activity, Wellness and Public Health Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK)

  • Markos Klonizakis

    (Lifestyle, Exercise and Nutrition Improvement Research Group, Department of Nursing and Midwifery, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK)

  • David Broom

    (Centre for Sport, Exercise and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK)

Abstract

Older adults and patients with chronic disease presenting with muscle weakness or musculoskeletal disorders may benefit from low-load resistance exercise (LLRE) with blood flow restriction (BFR). LLRE-BFR has been shown to increase muscle size, strength, and endurance comparable to traditional resistance exercise but without the use of heavy loads. However, potential negative effects from LLRE-BFR present as a barrier to participation and limit its wider use. This study examined the perceptual, affective, and cardiovascular responses to a bout of LLRE-BFR and compared the responses to LLRE and moderate-load resistance exercise (MLRE). Twenty older adults (64.3 ± 4.2 years) performed LLRE-BFR, LLRE and MLRE consisting of 4 sets of leg press and knee extension, in a randomised crossover design. LLRE-BFR was more demanding than LLRE and MLRE through increased pain ( p ≤ 0.024, d = 0.8–1.4) and reduced affect ( p ≤ 0.048, d = −0.5–−0.9). Despite this, LLRE-BFR was enjoyed and promoted a positive affective response ( p ≤ 0.035, d = 0.5–0.9) following exercise comparable to MLRE. This study supports the use of LLRE-BFR for older adults and encourages future research to examine the safety, acceptability, and efficacy of LLRE-BFR in patients with chronic disease.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Parkington & Thomas Maden-Wilkinson & Markos Klonizakis & David Broom, 2022. "Comparative Perceptual, Affective, and Cardiovascular Responses between Resistance Exercise with and without Blood Flow Restriction in Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16000-:d:989030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16000/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16000/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Devereux-Fitzgerald, Angela & Powell, Rachael & Dewhurst, Anne & French, David P., 2016. "The acceptability of physical activity interventions to older adults: A systematic review and meta-synthesis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 14-23.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hoffman, Geoffrey J. & Hays, Ron D. & Wallace, Steven P. & Shapiro, Martin F. & Ettner, Susan L., 2017. "Depressive symptomatology and fall risk among community-dwelling older adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 206-213.
    2. Angela Devereux-Fitzgerald & Rachael Powell & David P. French, 2021. "The Acceptability of Physical Activity to Older Adults Living in Lower Socioeconomic Status Areas: A Multi-Perspective Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Ka-Man Leung & Kai-Ling Ou & Pak-Kwong Chung & Cecilie Thøgersen-Ntoumani, 2021. "Older Adults’ Perceptions toward Walking: A Qualitative Study Using a Social-Ecological Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Beatriz Vallina Acha & Estrella Durá Ferrandis & Mireia Ferri Sanz & Maite Ferrando García, 2021. "Engaging People and Co-Producing Research with Persons and Communities to Foster Person-Centred Care: A Meta-Synthesis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-25, November.
    5. Laura Pagani & Demetrio Panarello, 2022. "Evaluation of a program for promoting physical activity and well-being: Friuli Venezia Giulia in Movimento," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 80(1), pages 97-120, April.
    6. Kerry West & Kate Purcell & Abby Haynes & Jennifer Taylor & Leanne Hassett & Catherine Sherrington, 2021. "“People Associate Us with Movement so It’s an Awesome Opportunity”: Perspectives from Physiotherapists on Promoting Physical Activity, Exercise and Sport," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-14, March.
    7. Amy Davies & David P. French & Angela Devereux-Fitzgerald & Elisabeth Boulton & Chris Todd & Chris Phillipson & Laura J. McGowan & Rachael Powell, 2021. "How Do Decision Makers and Service Providers Experience Participatory Approaches to Developing and Implementing Physical Activity Interventions with Older Adults? A Thematic Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-12, February.
    8. Darko Jekauc & Carina Nigg & Claudio R Nigg & Markus Reichert & Janina Krell-Roesch & Doris Oriwol & Steffen Schmidt & Kathrin Wunsch & Alexander Woll, 2020. "Measurement properties of the German version of the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale for adults," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Esmee Volders & Catherine A. W. Bolman & Renate H. M. de Groot & Peter Verboon & Lilian Lechner, 2020. "The Effect of Active Plus, a Computer-Tailored Physical Activity Intervention, on the Physical Activity of Older Adults with Chronic Illness(es)—A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, April.
    10. Rachel L. Knight & Melitta A. McNarry & Liba Sheeran & Adam W. Runacres & Rhys Thatcher & James Shelley & Kelly A. Mackintosh, 2021. "Moving Forward: Understanding Correlates of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour during COVID-19—An Integrative Review and Socioecological Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Clare A. Bartels & Estelle V. Lambert & Marié E. M. Young & Tracy Kolbe-Alexander, 2023. "If You Build It Will They Come? Park Upgrades, Park Use and Park-Based Physical Activity in Urban Cape Town, South Africa—The SUN Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-24, January.
    12. Eszter Füzéki & Jan Schröder & David A. Groneberg & Winfried Banzer, 2021. "Online Exercise Classes during the COVID-19 Related Lockdown in Germany: Use and Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-14, July.
    13. Kjær, Trine & Højgaard, Betina & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2019. "Physical exercise versus shorter life expectancy? An investigation into preferences for physical activity using a stated preference approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(8), pages 790-796.
    14. Deyu Meng & Hongzhi Guo & Siyu Liang & Zhibo Tian & Ran Wang & Guang Yang & Ziheng Wang, 2022. "Effectiveness of a Hybrid Exercise Program on the Physical Abilities of Frail Elderly and Explainable Artificial-Intelligence-Based Clinical Assistance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-15, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16000-:d:989030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.