Skip to main content
2023 NSCA National Conference Main banner
Icon Legend
This session is not in your schedule.
This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.
Back
Rate ePoster

Endurance Training/Cardiorespiratory

(54) THE IMPACT OF BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION COMBINED WITH VERTICAL COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMPS ON HEART RATE, BLOOD PRESSURE AND RATINGS OF PERCEIVED EXERTION

Friday, July 14, 2023
10:30 AM – 12:00 PM East Coast USA Time
Location: Milano III-IV

    Poster Presenter(s)

  • Ceara Chavez

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

    • Author(s)

  • Kieth Weber

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • MB

    Max Bethke

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • NC

    Nathan Cardon

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • NA

    Nathan Allred

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • CJ

    Cameron Jensen

    Student
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • MD

    Matt Denning

    Professor
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

  • Martin S. Dietze-Hermosa, CSCS,*D,

    Professor
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    idaho falls, Idaho, United States

  • RT

    Robert Thiebaud

    Professor
    Brigham Young University - Idaho
    Rexburg, Idaho, United States

Abstract Details: Blood flow restriction (BFR) is commonly combined with low loads and high repetitions during resistance exercise to increase muscle size and strength. Plyometric training such as vertical countermovement jumps are also typically performed with a high number of repetitions. Little research has investigated how BFR impacts vertical countermovement jumping. As plyometric training alone increases systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate, it is important to determine if the use of BFR increases blood pressure and heart rate while simultaneously measuring perceived overall exertion.

Purpose: Analyze the effects of BFR on the cardiovascular system and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during maximal vertical countermovement jumps.

Methods: Participants consisted of 12 male resistance-trained subjects (age: 24 ± 2 years). A cross-over randomized experimental design was used. On their first visit, participants were randomly assigned to either the non-BFR or BFR conditions, returning within a week to perform the other condition. Each visit consisted of 4 sets of 20 repetitions of maximal vertical countermovement jumps with BFR while the other visit consisted of  4 sets of 20 repetitions of maximal vertical countermovement jumps without BFR. There was a two-minute rest between each set with the BFR cuffs inflated throughout the BFR condition. However, following the second set, the cuffs were deflated before measuring SBP and then reinflated. BFR cuffs were placed at the most proximal part of the thigh and inflated to 60% of the participant’s personalized arterial occlusion pressure. SBP was measured at rest and after the second and fourth sets. Heart rate and RPE were measured at rest and after each set. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze the data.

Results: A significant time main effect for SBP was found from pre to mid-exercise and pre-to-post-exercise (126 ± 5 mmHg vs. 170 ± 5 mmHg, p< 0.001 & 126 ± 5 mmHg vs. 162 ± 5 mmHg). The effect size (omega-squared, 𝜔2) was 0.614. A significant time main effect for heart rate was found from resting to set 1, set 2, set 3, and set 4 (70 ± 2.6 bpm vs. 170 ± 2.6 bpm, 179 ± 2.6 bpm, 180 ± 2.6 bpm, 181 ± 2.6 bpm, p< 0.001) and the set 1 heart rate was significantly different from sets 2, 3 and 4 (170 ± 2.6 bpm vs. 179 ± 2.6bpm, 180 ± 2.6 bpm, 181 ± 2.6 bpm, p< 0.001). The effect size (𝜔2) for the heart rate main time effect was 0.958. Ratings of perceived exertion were not significantly different between control and BFR after each set (Set 1: 13.4 ± 1.6 vs. 12.6 ± 2.3, Set 2: 14.2 ± 1.6 vs. 14.3 ± 1.8, Set 3: 15.4 ± 1.4 vs. 15.3 ± 1.1, Set 4: 16.0 ± 1.5 vs. 16.5 ± 1.1, p >0.05). The effect size for the condition*time main effect for RPE was 0.028. CONCLUSIONS: Vertical countermovement jumps with BFR do not seem to create greater stress on the cardiovascular system and ratings of perceived exertion when compared to maximal vertical countermovement jumps without BFR. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: BFR can be combined with maximal vertical countermovement jump exercise without eliciting greater increases in heart rate or blood pressure than are found with normal maximal vertical countermovement jump exercise.

Acknowledgements: None