Neuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, 1499-002, Lisbon, Portugal.
CIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, 1499-002, Dafundo, Portugal.
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2021 Aug;121(8):2305-2321. doi: 10.1007/s00421-021-04708-2. Epub 2021 May 12.
Determine whether unilateral low-intensity blood-flow restricted (LIBFR) exercise is as effective as high-intensity (HI) resistance training for improving contralateral muscle strength.
Thirty healthy adults (20-30 years) were randomly allocated to the following dynamic plantar-flexion training interventions: HI [75% of one-repetition maximum (1RM), 4 sets, 10 reps] and LIBFR [20% of 1RM, 4 sets, 30 + 15 + 15 + 15 reps]. Evoked V-wave and H-reflex recruitment curves, as well as maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and panoramic ultrasound assessments of the trained and untrained soleus muscles were obtained pre-training, post-4 weeks of training and post-4 weeks of detraining.
Both interventions failed to increase contralateral MVC and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA). Yet, contralateral rate of torque development (RTD) was enhanced by both regimens (12-26%) and this was accompanied by heightened soleus EMG within the first milliseconds of the rising torque-time curve (14-22%; p < 0.05). These improvements were dissipated after detraining. Contralateral adaptations were not accompanied by changes in V-wave or H-reflex excitability. Conversely, LIBFR and HI elicited a similar magnitude of ipsilateral increase in MVC, RTD and CSA post-training (10-18%). Improvements in V-wave amplitude and soleus EMG were limited to the trained leg assigned to LIBFR training (p < 0.05). While gains in strength and CSA remained preserved post-4 weeks of detraining, this did not occur with RTD.
Since gains in RTD were similar between interventions, our findings indicate that both training regimens can be used interchangeably for improving contralateral rapid torque production. Ultimately, this may be beneficial in circumstances of limb immobilization after injury or surgery.
确定单侧低强度血流限制(LIBFR)运动是否与高强度(HI)抗阻训练一样有效改善对侧肌肉力量。
30 名健康成年人(20-30 岁)被随机分配到以下动态足底屈肌训练干预措施中:HI[75%的 1 次重复最大值(1RM),4 组,10 次]和 LIBFR[20%的 1RM,4 组,30+15+15+15 次]。在训练前、4 周训练后和 4 周停训后,获得了受训练和未受训练比目鱼肌的诱发 V 波和 H 反射募集曲线以及最大自主收缩(MVC)和全景超声评估。
两种干预措施均未能增加对侧 MVC 和肌肉横截面积(CSA)。然而,两种方案都增强了对侧扭矩发展率(RTD)(12-26%),这伴随着在上升扭矩时间曲线的最初几毫秒内比目鱼肌 EMG 增加(14-22%;p<0.05)。这些改善在停训后消失。对侧适应性没有伴随着 V 波或 H 反射兴奋性的变化。相反,LIBFR 和 HI 在训练后引起了相似程度的同侧 MVC、RTD 和 CSA 的增加(10-18%)。V 波振幅和比目鱼肌 EMG 的改善仅限于接受 LIBFR 训练的训练腿(p<0.05)。虽然在停训后 4 周时,强度和 CSA 的增加仍然保持不变,但 RTD 并没有增加。
由于两种干预措施的 RTD 增加相似,我们的发现表明,这两种训练方案可以互换使用,以提高对侧快速扭矩产生。最终,这在受伤或手术后肢体固定的情况下可能是有益的。