John C. Sieverdes, Korey C. Little, Wesley D. Dudgeon. College of Charleston, Charleston, SC.

BACKGROUND: Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a training method used to restrict venous return by partially occluding limbs to increase metabolic stress using lighter loads during exercise training. This modality has been proven to increase muscular conditioning and elicit changes in muscular cross-sectional area and endurance. Conventional BFR training methodologies often utilize a 30-15-15-15 rep scheme. The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility of other exercise parameters on time-under tension (TUT) and load interactions on muscular fatigue. METHODS: Five resistance-trained men (mean age = 21.0 [SD1.9] yrs) attended 3 laboratory visits. Baseline biceps brachii peak torque was assessed using an isokinetic arm curl protocol on a Biodex dynamometer. Four BFR arm-curl conditions (i.e., all 30% occlusion with 30 second rest between sets) were randomized to each arm for per visit resulting in 5 measures for each condition (A: standard 30% 1RM, 30,15,15,15 reps 3 sec/rep; B: 50% 1RM, 15, 10, 10, 10 reps, 6 sec/rep; C: 30%1RM, 12, 9, 9, 9 reps, 6 sec/rep; D:50%1RM, 15, 10, 10, 10, 10, 3 sec/rep. Blood lactate was assessed for 5 minutes after the exercise with peak arm isokinetic curl torque measured at 7 minutes. RESULTS: Participants were able to complete 91% of condition A’s repetitions, 41% of condition B, 99% of condition C, and 68% of condition D. RPE was highest for condition B, followed by D, A, then C. Muscular time by load burden was calculated by TUT and TUT x load. Condition A had notably higher session TUT (191 sec; p = .035) and TUT x load = 7388.11 sec*kg (p = .001) compared to the next highest condition C (TUT = 109, TUT * load = 1994.9 sec*kg. Non-statistically significant changes in max isokinetic torque between baseline and conditions showed fatigue for A (-3.9 [SD8.62]) but not for B (1.27 [SD 11.04]), C (3.47 [SD 10.17]), or D (2.17 [SD 9.4]). Peak lactate trended higher for condition A at 3.8 (SD.86) and B at 3.5 (SD.61) with conditions D (3.0 [SD1.02]) and C (2.4 [SD.68]) being lower (p-value = .074). CONCLUSION: Increasing the %1RM and or slowing rep speed resulted in participants not meeting the repetition targets and resulted in significantly lower exercise volume than the standard 30%1RM with a 30, 15, 15, 15 repetition scheme.

This document is currently not available here.