Suppr超能文献

血流限制技术的应用与副作用:专业人员的横断面问卷调查

Application and side effects of blood flow restriction technique: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of professionals.

作者信息

de Queiros Victor Sabino, Dantas Matheus, Neto Gabriel Rodrigues, da Silva Luiz Felipe, Assis Marina Gonçalves, Almeida-Neto Paulo Francisco, Dantas Paulo Moreira Silva, Cabral Breno Guilherme de Araújo Tinôco

机构信息

Master of Science in Physical Education, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, Rio Grande do Norte.

Professional Master's in Family Health/Physical Education Coordination/Physiotherapy Coordination, Faculties of Nursing and Medicine Nova Esperança (FACENE/FAMENE), João Pessoa.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 May 7;100(18):e25794. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025794.

Abstract

The physiological benefits of applying blood flow restriction (BFR) in isolation or in the presence of physical exercise have been widely documented in the scientific literature. Most investigations carried out under controlled laboratory conditions have found the technique to be safe. However, few studies have analyzed the use of the technique in clinical settings.To analyze how the BFR technique has been applied by professionals working in the clinical area and the prevalence of side effects (SEs) resulting from the use of this technique.This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 136 Brazilian professionals who perform some function related to physical rehabilitation, sports science, or physical conditioning participated in this study. Participants answered a self-administered online questionnaire consisting of 21 questions related to the professional profile and methodological aspects and SEs of the BFR technique.Professionals reported applying the BFR technique on individuals from different age groups from youth (≤18 years; 3.5%) to older adults (60-80 years; 30.7%), but mainly on people within the age group of 20 to 29 years (74.6%). A total of 99.1% of the professionals coupled the BFR technique with resistance exercise. Their main goals were muscle hypertrophy and physical rehabilitation. The majority (60.9%) of interviewees reported using BFR in durations of less than 5 minutes and the pressure used was mainly determined through the values of brachial blood pressure and arterial occlusion. Moreover, 92% of professionals declared observing at least 1 SE resulting from the BFR technique. Most professionals observed tingling (71.2%) and delayed onset of muscle soreness (55.8%). Rhabdomyolysis, fainting, and subcutaneous hemorrhaging were reported less frequently (1.9%, 3.8%, and 4.8%, respectively).Our findings indicate that the prescription of blood flow restriction technique results in minimal serious side effects when it is done in a proper clinical environment and follows the proposed recommendations found in relevant scientific literature.

摘要

单独应用或在体育锻炼时应用血流限制(BFR)的生理益处已在科学文献中得到广泛记载。大多数在受控实验室条件下进行的研究都发现该技术是安全的。然而,很少有研究分析该技术在临床环境中的应用情况。为了分析临床领域的专业人员如何应用BFR技术以及使用该技术产生副作用(SEs)的发生率。这是一项横断面研究。共有136名从事与物理康复、运动科学或体能训练相关工作的巴西专业人员参与了本研究。参与者回答了一份自行填写的在线问卷,该问卷由21个与专业背景、方法学方面以及BFR技术的SEs相关的问题组成。专业人员报告称,他们将BFR技术应用于从青年(≤18岁;3.5%)到老年人(60 - 80岁;30.7%)等不同年龄组的个体,但主要是应用于20至29岁年龄组的人群(74.6%)。共有99.1%的专业人员将BFR技术与抗阻运动相结合。他们的主要目标是肌肉肥大和身体康复。大多数(60.9%)受访者报告使用BFR的持续时间少于5分钟,所使用的压力主要通过肱动脉血压值和动脉闭塞来确定。此外,92%的专业人员宣称观察到至少一种由BFR技术导致的SEs。大多数专业人员观察到刺痛(71.2%)和延迟性肌肉酸痛(55.8%)。横纹肌溶解、昏厥和皮下出血的报告频率较低(分别为1.9%、3.8%和4.8%)。我们的研究结果表明,在适当的临床环境中并遵循相关科学文献中提出的建议进行血流限制技术的处方时,产生的严重副作用极少。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c11/8104249/97f3c33fd665/medi-100-e25794-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验