Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Effect of blood-flow restricted vs. heavy-load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Prevalence and severity of groin problems in Spanish football: A prospective study beyond the time-loss approach

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Cardiovascular and metabolic health effects of team handball training in overweight women: Impact of prior experience

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Physical activity during pregnancy and intelligence in sons; A cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Influence of between-limb asymmetry in muscle mass, strength, and power on functional capacity in healthy older adults

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. Determination and validation of peak fat oxidation in endurance-trained men using an upper body graded exercise test

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. The effectiveness of exercise-based rehabilitation to patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms-An explorative study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

INTRODUCTION: Heavy-load strength training (HLT) is generally considered the Gold Standard exercise modality for inducing gains in skeletal muscle strength. However, use of heavy external exercise loads may be contraindicative in frail individuals. Low-load resistance exercise combined with partial blood-flow restriction (LL-BFR exercise) may offer an effective alternative for increasing mechanical muscle strength and size. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of LL-BFR training to HLT on maximal muscle strength gains. Prospero registration-id (CRD42014013382).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search in six healthcare science databases and reference lists was conducted. Data selected for primary analysis consisted of post-intervention changes in maximal muscle strength. A random-effects meta-analysis with standardized mean differences (SMD) was used.

RESULTS: Of 1413 papers identified through systematic search routines, sixteen papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, totalling 153 participants completing HLT and 157 completing LL-BFR training. The magnitude of training-induced gains in maximal muscle strength did not differ between LL-BFR training and HLT (SMD of -0.17 (95% CI: -0.40; 0.05)). Low between-study heterogeneity was noted (I 2 = 0.0%, Chi 2 P = 9.65).

CONCLUSION: Low-load blood-flow-restricted training appears equally effective of producing gains in maximal voluntary muscle strength compared to HLT in 20- to 80-year-old healthy and habitually active adults.

Original languageEnglish
JournalScandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports
Volume30
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)837-848
Number of pages12
ISSN0905-7188
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2020

Bibliographical note

© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Research areas

  • BFR, blood-flow restriction, high-load exercise, HLT, muscle strength, occlusion training, resistance exercise, strength training

ID: 59267193