Upper-extremity blood flow restriction: the proximal, distal, and contralateral effects-a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Blood flow restriction (BFR) training with low weight is purported to induce similar physiological changes to high-weight regimens with the benefit of less tissue stress. We hypothesized that low-weight training with BFR would produce increased gains in strength and hypertrophy for muscle groups proximal, distal, and contralateral to tourniquet placement compared with low-weight training alone. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, healthy subjects were randomized into a 6-week low-weight training program either with or without BFR on 1 extremity. Outcome measures included limb circumference and strength. Comparisons were made between the BFR and non-BFR extremities, BFR and control groups, and non-BFR extremity and control groups. RESULTS: A total of 24 subjects (14 BFR and 10 control subjects) completed the protocol. Significantly greater gains were observed in dynamometric strength both proximal (shoulder scaption [30% greater], flexion [23%], and abduction [22%]) and distal (grip strength [13%]) to the tourniquet in the BFR limb compared with both the non-BFR extremity and the control group (P < .05). Arm and forearm circumferences significantly increased in the BFR limb compared with the non-BFR limb and control group (P = .01). The non-BFR extremity demonstrated greater grip strength than the control group (9%, P < .01). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Low-weight BFR training provided a greater increase in strength and hypertrophy in the upper-extremity proximal and distal muscle groups compared with the control group. The non-BFR extremity showed a significant increase in grip strength compared with the control group, indicating a potential systemic effect.

Enhanced Recovery Pathway Improves Colorectal Surgery Outcomes in Private and Safety-Net Settings.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) can decrease length of stay (LOS) and improve colorectal surgery outcomes in private health care; however, their efficacy in the public realm, comprised largely of underserved and uninsured patients, remains uncertain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An ERP without social interventions was implemented at a private hospital (PH) and a safety-net hospital (SNH) within a large academic medical center in 2014. Process and outcome metrics from 100 patients in the 18 mo before ERP implementation at each institution were retrospectively compared with a similar group after ERP implementation. Primary outcomes were LOS, 30-d readmission, and reoperation. RESULTS: Post-ERP groups were older than pre-ERP (P = 0.047, 0.034), with no difference in sex or body mass index. Rate of open versus minimally invasive was similar at the SNH (P = 0.067), whereas more post-ERP patients at PH underwent open surgery (P = 0.002). Ninety six percentage of PH patients were funded through private insurance or Medicare, verses 6% at the SNH. LOS at PH decreased from 8.1 to 5.9 d (P = 0.028) and at SNH from 7.0 to 5.1 d (P = 0.004). There was no change in 30-d all-cause readmission (PH P = 0.634; SNH P = 1) or reoperation (PH P = 0.610; SNH P = 0.066). CONCLUSIONS: ERP reduced LOS in both private and safety-net settings without addressing social determinants of health. Readmission and reoperation rates were unchanged. As health care moves toward a bundled payment model, ERP can help optimize outcomes and control costs in the public arena.

Proximal, Distal, and Contralateral Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training on the Lower Extremities: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND:: Blood flow restriction (BFR) training involves low-weight exercises performed under vascular occlusion via an inflatable cuff. For patients who cannot tolerate high-load exercises, BFR training reportedly provides the benefits of high-load regimens, with the advantage of less tissue and joint stress. HYPOTHESIS:: Low-load BFR training is safe and efficacious for strengthening muscle groups proximal, distal, and contralateral to tourniquet placement in the lower extremities. STUDY DESIGN:: Randomized controlled trial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Level 1. METHODS:: This was a randomized controlled trial of healthy participants completing a standardized 6-week course of BFR training. Patients were randomized to BFR training on 1 extremity or to a control group. Patients were excluded for cardiac, pulmonary, or hematologic disease; pregnancy; or previous surgery in the extremity. Data collected at baseline and completion included limb circumferences and strength testing. RESULTS:: The protocol was completed by 26 patients, providing 16 BFR and 10 control patients (mean patient age, 27 years; 62% female). A statistically greater increase in strength was seen proximal and distal to the BFR tourniquet when compared with both the nontourniquet extremity and the control group ( P < 0.05). Approximately twice the improvement was seen in the BFR group compared with controls. Isokinetic testing showed greater increases in knee extension peak torque (3% vs 11%), total work (6% vs 15%), and average power (4% vs 12%) for the BFR group ( P < 0.04). Limb circumference significantly increased in both the thigh (0.8% vs 3.5%) and the leg (0.4% vs 2.8%) compared with the control group ( P < 0.01). Additionally, a significant increase occurred in thigh girth (0.8% vs 2.3%) and knee extension strength (3% vs 8%) in the nontourniquet BFR extremity compared with the control group ( P < 0.05). There were no reported adverse events. CONCLUSION:: Low-load BFR training led to a greater increase in muscle strength and limb circumference. BFR training had similar strengthening effects on both proximal and distal muscle groups. Gains in the contralateral extremity may corroborate a systemic or crossover effect. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:: BFR training strengthens muscle groups proximal, distal, and contralateral to cuff placement. Patients undergoing therapy for various orthopaedic conditions may benefit from low-load BFR training with the advantage of less tissue stress.

Comprehensive hands-on training for influenza vaccine manufacturing: a WHO-BARDA-BTEC partnership for global workforce development.

The critical need for enhancing influenza pandemic preparedness in many developing nations has led the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to develop an international influenza vaccine capacity-building program. Among the critical limitations faced by many of these nations is lack of access to training programs for staff supporting operations within vaccine production facilities. With support from BARDA, the Biomanufacturing Training and Education Center (BTEC) at North Carolina State University has addressed this need for training by developing and delivering a comprehensive training program, consisting of three courses: Fundamentals of cGMP Influenza Vaccine Manufacturing, Advanced Upstream Processes for Influenza Vaccine Manufacturing, and Advanced Downstream Processes for Influenza Vaccine Manufacturing. The courses cover process design, transfer, and execution at manufacturing scale, quality systems, and regulations covering both manufacturing and approval of pandemic vaccines. The Fundamentals course focuses on the concepts, equipment, applicable regulations, and procedures commonly used to produce influenza vaccine. The two Advanced courses focus on process design, scale up, validation, and new technologies likely to improve efficiency of vaccine production. All three courses rely on a combination of classroom instruction and hands-on training in BTEC's various laboratories. Each course stands alone, and participants may take one or more of the three courses. Overall participant satisfaction with the courses has been high, and follow-up surveys show that participants actively transferred the knowledge they gained to the workplace. Future plans call for BTEC to continue offering the three courses and to create an online version of several modules of the Fundamentals course.