•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Exploring how different training protocols affect arterial elasticity and cardiovascular metrics could guide improved fitness interventions. While BFR improves muscle strength at lower intensities and RLT aids recovery, their combined effects on arterial stiffness and pulse wave velocity are still under research. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the effects of various anaerobic training methods, with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) and red-light therapy (RLT) on pulse wave velocity (PWV) and several other hemodynamic variables. METHODS: Ten healthy participants (5 female, 5 male, age = 21.85 ± 2.0 years) were randomly assigned to one of five experimental groups: High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT), Moderate-Intensity Interval Training with BFR (MIIT+BFR), Low-Intensity Interval Training with BFR (LIIT+BFR), HIIT with RLT (HIIT+RLT), and MIIT with both BFR and RLT (MIIT+BFR+RLT). Each group performed five randomized, 1-hour training sessions with varying intensity protocols. HIIT sessions were conducted at 80-100% of maximum power, while MIIT+BFR was at 60-80% and LIIT+BFR at 40-60%. In the RLT groups (HIIT+RLT, MIIT+BFR+RLT), red-light therapy was applied for 20 minutes post-exercise, while the non-RLT groups rested for 20 minutes after training. Arterial elasticity, a key indicator of vascular health, was assessed pre-exercise, immediately post-exercise, and post-rest. The Wagner Digital Force Gauge (WDFG) was used to quantify muscle soreness and discomfort in the quadriceps before and 24 hours after each session. The BRUMS scale was used to evaluate mood and recovery in response to different training protocols. RESULTS: No significant differences in mood (BRUMS) or soreness (WDFG) were observed between the training groups. However, significant time effects were noted in several cardiovascular metrics, including augmentation index 75 (AIx75) (p<0.01), ejection duration percentage (ED%) (p<0.01), heart rate (HR) period (p<0.01), and arterial pressure (AP) (p<0.01). Specifically, AIx75, a measure of arterial stiffness, and ED%, a measure of the heart’s pumping efficiency, showed significant changes over time. Furthermore, forward pulse height, exhibited significant time-by-condition interactions (p<0.03), suggesting that the combination of training protocols could alter arterial function differently. CONCLUSION: Although no significant differences were found in performance or mood recovery across the different training conditions, substantial changes in cardiovascular metrics, such as AIx75, ED%, AP, and HR, indicate that anaerobic training protocols can influence vascular health. Notably, BFR training appeared to have a greater effect on cardiovascular responses than RLT. Further research with larger samples is needed to clarify the combined effects of BFR and RLT on arterial health and recovery.

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.