首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Exercise Science >The Effect of Cuff Width for Determining Limb Occlusion Pressure: A Comparison of Blood Flow Restriction Devices
【2h】

The Effect of Cuff Width for Determining Limb Occlusion Pressure: A Comparison of Blood Flow Restriction Devices

机译:袖带宽度对确定肢体阻塞压力的影响:血流限制装置的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The purpose of this study was to compare the standing lower extremity limb occlusion pressure (LOP) between two units. It was hypothesized that the Delfi unit, which utilizes a wider cuff (11.5 cm), would require significantly less LOP as compared to the KAASTU unit, which utilizes a narrow cuff (5 cm). Twenty-nine healthy participants (22 men, 7 women) mean age 24 years old (± 1.7 SD) volunteered. The procedure was identical for each cuff, completed with 5 minutes of rest in between. The cuff was placed on the proximal left thigh in the standing position. The initial pressure was set to 50 mmHg and then increased in 50 mmHg increments until complete arterial occlusion was achieved or the unit went to its maximum pressure. Arterial blood flow was determined by a mobile ultrasound measured at the left popliteal artery. Paired samples t-tests were used to determine differences in LOP (mmHg) between the Delfi and KAATSU unit cuffs. Significant differences were observed between the cuffs (wide: 239.4 mmHg vs. narrow: 500 mmHg; p < 0.001). We were able to achieve complete arterial occlusion with the wide cuff. The KAATSU unit reached maximum pressure with all participants, therefore we were unable to achieve complete arterial occlusion with the narrow cuff. Although achieving complete arterial occlusion is not indicated or safe for BFR training, relative pressures are used and determined as a percentage of LOP. Our study found that the relative pressure of the wide cuff is lower than the narrow cuff.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较两个单位之间站立的下肢肢体闭塞压力(LOP)。据推测,与使用狭窄袖带(5 cm)的KAASTU装置相比,使用较宽袖带(11.5 cm)的Delfi装置所需的LOP明显更少。有29名健康参与者(22名男性,7名女性)平均年龄为24岁(±1.7 SD)。每个袖带的操作步骤都相同,中间需要休息5分钟。将袖带以站立姿势放置在左大腿近端。初始压力设置为50 mmHg,然后以50 mmHg的增量增加,直到达到完全的动脉闭塞或单位达到其最大压力。通过在左pop动脉测量的移动超声确定动脉血流量。配对的样本t检验用于确定Delfi和KAATSU单位袖带之间LOP(mmHg)的差异。在袖带之间观察到显着差异(宽:239.4 mmHg vs窄:500 mmHg; p <0.001)。我们能够用宽袖口实现完全的动脉闭塞。 KAATSU装置的所有参与者均达到最大压力,因此我们无法用狭窄的袖带实现完全的动脉闭塞。尽管没有迹象表明完全动脉闭塞或对于BFR训练是安全的,但仍使用相对压力并将其确定为LOP的百分比。我们的研究发现,宽袖带的相对压力低于窄袖带。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号