Handcycling with concurrent lower body low-frequency electromyostimulation significantly increases acute oxygen uptake in elite wheelchair basketball players: an acute crossover trial.

OBJECTIVE: Wheelchair basketball (WCB) demands high-intensity training due to its intermittent nature. However, acute oxygen uptake (V˙O2) in handcycling is restricted. Combining handcycling with low-frequency electromyostimulation (LF-EMS) may enhance V˙O2 in elite WBC athletes. DESIGN: Randomized crossover trail. SUBJECTS: Twelve German national team WCB players (age: 25.6 [5.6] years, height: 1.75 [0.16] m, mass: 74.0 [21.7] kg, classification: 2.92 [1.26]). METHOD: Participants underwent 2×5 min of handcycling (60 rpm, ¾ bodyweight resistance in watts) (HANDCYCLE) and 2×5 min of handcycling with concurrent LF-EMS (EMS_HANDCYCLE). LF-EMS (4Hz, 350µs, continuous stimulation) targeted gluteal, quadriceps, and calf muscles, adjusted to individual pain thresholds (buttocks: 69.5 [22.3] mA, thighs: 66.8 [20.0] mA, calves: 68.9 [31.5] mA). RESULTS: Significant mode-dependent differences between HANDCYCLE and EMS_HANDCYCLE were found in V˙O2 (17.60 [3.57] vs 19.23 [4.37] ml min-1 kg-1, p = 0.001) and oxygen pulse (16.69 [4.51] vs 18.41 [5.17] ml, p = 0.002). ΔLactate was significantly lower in HANDCYCLE (0.04 [0.28] vs 0.31 [0.26] mmol l-1). Although perceived effort did not differ (p = 0.293), discomfort was rated lower in HANDCYCLE (1.44 [1.28] vs 3.94 [2.14], p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: LF-EMS applied to the lower extremities increases oxygen demand during submaximal handcycling. Thus, longitudinal application of LF-EMS should be investigated as a potential training stimulus to improve aerobic capacity in wheelchair athletes.

Five-Week, Low-Intensity Blood Flow Restriction Rowing Improves V̇ o2 max in Elite Rowers.

ABSTRACT: Held, S, Rappelt, L, Rein, R, Deutsch, J-P, Wiedenmann, T, and Donath, L. Five-week, low-intensity, blood flow restriction rowing improves V̇ o2 max in elite rowers. J Strength Cond Res 38(6): e299-e303, 2024-This controlled intervention study examined the effects of low-intensity rowing with blood flow restriction (BFR) on maximal oxygen uptake (V̇ o2 max), peak power output during ramp testing (PPO), and 2000-m time trial performance (P2k). Eleven, highly elite, male rowers (22.1 ± 1.6 years; 92.6 ± 3.8 kg; 1.93 ± 0.04 m; 7.9. ± 2.2 years rowing experience; 20.4 ± 2.0 h·w -1 training volume; 11.9 ± 1.1 session per week) trained 5 weeks without BFR (Base) followed by a 5-week BFR intervention period. BFR of the lower limb was applied through customized elastic wraps. BFR took place 3 times a week (accumulated net pBFR: 60 min·wk -1 ; occlusion per session: 2 times 10 min·session -1 ) and was used exclusively at low intensities (<2 mmol·L -1 ). V̇ o2 max, PPO, and P2k were examined before, between, and after both intervention periods. Bayesian's credible intervals revealed relevantly increased V̇ o2 max +0.30 L·min -1 (95% credible interval: +0.00 to +0.61 L·min -1 ) adaptations through BFR. By contrast, PPO +14 W (-6 to +34 W) and P2k -5 W (-14 to +3 W) were not noticeably affected by the BFR intervention. This study revealed that 15 sessions of BFR application with a cumulative total BFR load of 5 h over a 5-week macrocycle increased V̇ o2 max remarkably. Thus, pBFR might serve as a promising tool to improve aerobic capacity in highly trained elite rowers.

Restricted nasal-only breathing during self-selected low intensity training does not affect training intensity distribution.

Introduction: Low-intensity endurance training is frequently performed at gradually higher training intensities than intended, resulting in a shift towards threshold training. By restricting oral breathing and only allowing for nasal breathing this shift might be reduced. Methods: Nineteen physically healthy adults (3 females, age: 26.5 ± 5.1 years; height: 1.77 ± 0.08 m; body mass: 77.3 ± 11.4 kg; VO2peak: 53.4 ± 6.6 mL·kg-1 min-1) performed 60 min of self-selected, similar (144.7 ± 56.3 vs. 147.0 ± 54.2 W, p = 0.60) low-intensity cycling with breathing restriction (nasal-only breathing) and without restrictions (oro-nasal breathing). During these sessions heart rate, respiratory gas exchange data and power output data were recorded continuously. Results: Total ventilation (p < 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.45), carbon dioxide release (p = 0.02, ηp 2 = 0.28), oxygen uptake (p = 0.03, ηp 2 = 0.23), and breathing frequency (p = 0.01, ηp 2 = 0.35) were lower during nasal-only breathing. Furthermore, lower capillary blood lactate concentrations were found towards the end of the training session during nasal-only breathing (time x condition-interaction effect: p = 0.02, ηp 2 = 0.17). Even though discomfort was rated marginally higher during nasal-only breathing (p = 0.03, ηp 2 = 0.24), ratings of perceived effort did not differ between the two conditions (p ≥ 0.06, ηp 2 = 0.01). No significant "condition" differences were found for intensity distribution (time spent in training zone quantified by power output and heart rate) (p ≥ 0.24, ηp 2 ≤ 0.07). Conclusion: Nasal-only breathing seems to be associated with possible physiological changes that may help to maintain physical health in endurance athletes during low intensity endurance training. However, it did not prevent participants from performing low-intensity training at higher intensities than intended. Longitudinal studies are warranted to evaluate longitudinal responses of changes in breathing patterns.

Low-intensity climbing with blood flow restriction over 5 weeks increases grip and elbow flexor endurance in advanced climbers: A randomized controlled trial.

Grip and elbow flexor strength and endurance are crucial performance surrogates in competitive climbing. Thus, we examined the effects of blood flow restricted (BFR) climbing on grip and elbow flexor performance. Fifteen trained climbers (8 females; 20.8 ± 7.0 yrs; 1.72 ± 0.08 m; 63.0 ± 9.7 kg; 21.7 ± 2.7 IRCRCA grade) were either assigned to the intervention (BFR) or control (noBFR) group, using the minimization method (Strata: age, height, body mass, gender, and IRCRA grade). While BFR was used during low-intensity climbing training (2-times 10 min/session; 3-times/week), noBFR followed identical training protocols without BFR over 5 weeks. BFR of the upper limb was applied via customized pneumatic cuffs (occlusion pressure: 120 ± 23 mmHg, 75%; occlusion pressure). Endurance and strength performances were assessed via one-handed rung pulling (GripSTRENGTH), one-handed bent arm lock off at 90° (ArmSTRENGTH), static-intermitted finger hang (GripENDURANCE), and bent arm hang (ArmENDURANCE). Bayesian credible intervals revealed increased GripENDURANCE (+21 s (95% credible interval: -2 to 43 s)) and ArmENDURANCE +11 s (-5 to 27 s); adaptations via BFR. In contrast, GripSTRENGTH +4 N (-40 to 48 N) and ArmSTRENGTH +4 N (-68 to 75 N) were not affected by the BFR intervention. Fifteen cumulative sessions of BFR application with a cumulative total BFR load of 5 h over a 5 weeks macrocycle remarkably increased grip and elbow flexor endurance. Thus, BFR might serve as a promising means to improve relevant performance surrogates in trained climbers.

Blood flow restricted (BFR) climbing induced superior grip and elbow flexor endurance adaptations compared to non-restricted climbing training over a 5-week lasting training periodBFR and non-BFR climbing training induced similar grip and elbow flexor strength adaptationsTherefore, BFR served as a feasible, promising and beneficial complementary training stimuli additionally to the sheduled climbing training program.

Blood Flow Restricted Cycling Impairs Subsequent Jumping But Not Balance Performance Slightly More Than Non-Restricted Cycling: An Acute Randomized Controlled Cross-Over Trial.

Chronic blood flow restriction (BFR) training has been shown to improve drop jumping (DJ) and balance performance. However, the acute effects of low intensity BFR cycling on DJ and balance indices have not yet been examined. 28 healthy young adults (9 female; 21.8 ± 2.7years; 1.79 ± 0.08m; 73.9 ± 9.5kg) performed DJ and balance testing before and immediately after 20min low intensity cycling (40% of power at maximal oxygen uptake) with (BFR) and without BFR (noBFR). For DJ related parameters, no significant mode × time interactions were found (p ≥ 0.221, ηp 2 ≤ 0.06). Large time effects for DJ heights and the reactive strength index were observed (p < 0.001, ηp 2 ≥ 0.42). Pairwise comparison revealed notably lower values for both DJ jumping height and reactive strength index at post compared to pre (BFR: -7.4 ± 9.4%, noBFR: -4.2 ± 7.4%). No statistically significant mode × time interactions (p ≥ 0.36; ηp 2 ≤ 0.01) have been observed for balance testing. Low intensity cycling with BFR results in increased (p ≤ 0.01; SMD ≥ 0.72) mean heart rate (+14 ± 8bpm), maximal heart rate (+16 ± 12 bpm), lactate (+0.7 ± 1.2 mmol/L), perceived training intensity (+2.5 ± 1.6au) and pain scores (+4.9 ± 2.2au) compared to noBFR. BFR cycling induced acutely impaired DJ performance, but balance performance was not affected, compared to noBFR cycling. Heart rate, lactate, perceived training intensity, and pain scores were increased during BFR cycling.

Increased oxygen uptake in well-trained runners during uphill high intensity running intervals: A randomized crossover testing.

The time spent above 90% of maximal oxygen uptake ( V ˙ O2max) during high-intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions is intended to be maximized to improve V ˙ O2max. Since uphill running serves as a promising means to increase metabolic cost, we compared even and moderately inclined running in terms of time ≥90% V ˙ O2max and its corresponding physiological surrogates. Seventeen well-trained runners (8 females & 9 males; 25.8 ± 6.8yrs; 1.75 ± 0.08m; 63.2 ± 8.4kg; V ˙ O2max: 63.3 ± 4.2 ml/min/kg) randomly completed both a horizontal (1% incline) and uphill (8% incline) HIIT protocol (4-times 5min, with 90s rest). Mean oxygen uptake ( V ˙ O2mean), peak oxygen uptake ( V ˙ O2peak), lactate, heart rate (HR), and perceived exertion (RPE) were measured. Uphill HIIT revealed higher (p ≤ 0.012; partial eta-squared (pes) ≥ 0.351) V ˙ O2mean (uphill: 3.3 ± 0.6 vs. horizontal: 3.2 ± 0.5 L/min; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.15), V ˙ O2peak (uphill: 4.0 ± 0.7 vs. horizontal: 3.8 ± 0.7 L/min; SMD = 0.19), and accumulated time ≥90% V ˙ O2max (uphill: 9.1 ± 4.6 vs. horizontal: 6.4 ± 4.0 min; SMD = 0.62) compared to even HIIT. Lactate, HR, and RPE responses did not show mode*time rANOVA interaction effects (p ≥ 0.097; pes ≤0.14). Compared to horizontal HIIT, moderate uphill HIIT revealed higher fractions of V ˙ O2max at comparable perceived efforts, heartrate and lactate response. Therefore, moderate uphill HiiT notably increased time spent above 90% V ˙ O2max.

Low-intensity swimming with blood flow restriction over 5 weeks increases VO2peak: A randomized controlled trial using Bayesian informative prior distribution.

Peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and speed at first (LT1, minimal lactate equivalent) and second lactate threshold (LT2 = LT1 +1.5 mmol·L-1) are crucial swimming performance surrogates. The present randomized controlled study investigated the effects of blood flow restriction (BFR) during low-intensity swimming (LiT) on VO2peak, LT1, and LT2. Eighteen male swimmers (22.7 ±3.0 yrs; 69.9 ±8.5 kg; 1.8 ±0.1 m) were either assigned to the BFR or control (noBFR) group. While BFR was applied during LiT, noBFR completed the identical LIT without BFR application. BFR of the upper limb was applied via customized pneumatic cuffs (75% of occlusion pressure: 135 ±10 mmHg; 8 cm cuff width). BFR training took place three times a week over 5 weeks (accumulated weekly net BFR training: 60 min·week-1; occlusion per session: 2-times 10 min·session-1) and was used exclusively at low intensities. VO2peak, LT1, and LT2 diagnostics were employed. Bayesian credible intervals revealed notable VO2peak improvements by +0.29 L·min-1 kg-1 (95% credible interval: -0.26 to +0.85 L·min-1 kg-1) when comparing BFR vs. noBFR. Speed at LT1 -0.01 m·s-1 (-0.04 to +0.02 m·s-1) and LT2 -0.01 m·s-1 (-0.03 to +0.02 m·s-1) did not change meaningfully when BFR was employed. Fifteen sessions of LIT swimming (macrocycle of 5 h over 5 weeks) with a weekly volume of 60 min with BFR application adds additional impact on VO2peak improvement compared to noBFR LIT swimming. Occasional BFR applications should be considered as a promising means to improve relevant performance surrogates in trained swimmers.HighlightsLow-intensity swimming with blood flow restricted (BFR) induced superior peak oxygen consumption adaptations compared to non-restricted swimming training over a 5-week lasting training periodBFR and non-BFR swimming training-induced similar adaptations regarding swimming speed at first and second lactate thresholdIn conclusion, BFR served as a feasible, promising and beneficial complementary training stimuli to traditional swimming training regarding oxygen consumption adaptations.

Exercise based reduction of falls in communitydwelling older adults: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traditional meta-analyses with pairwise direct comparison revealed that a variety of exercise-based training interventions can prevent falls in community-dwelling older adults. This network meta-analysis adds value by comparing and ranking different exercise training strategies based on their effects on fall risk reductions determined by analysis of direct and indirect comparisons. METHODS: The studies included in this network meta-analysis were identified through a comprehensive search in five biomedical databases (PubMed, SportDiscus, CINAHL, Web of Science and EMBASE). We included (randomized) controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the occurance of fall events in older adults who received different interventional treatments. RESULTS: Seventy six comparisons from 66 RCTs with 47.420 (61% male / 39% female) participants aged 77 ± 4 (68 - 88) years were included in this network meta-analysis. The network model revealed low heterogeneity (I2 = 28.0, 95%CI 1.0 to 47.7%) and inconsistency (Q between designs = 15.1, p = 0.37). Postural control training was found to be most effective in preventing falls (Postural Control Training: (home): Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.66, 95%-CI [0.49; 0.88], P-score = 0.97;Postural Control Training: RR = 0.82, 95%-CI [0.75; 0.91], P-score = 0.82). Combined and multifactorial interventions also display a robust but smaller effect (RR = 0.88-0.93, P-score = 0.65-0.47). CONCLUSION: Physical activity that includes balance training presents itself to be the most effective. Multifactorial approaches are well investigated but could be slightly less effective than isolated postural control training.

Validity and Reliability of a Commercial Force Sensor for the Measurement of Upper Body Strength in Sport Climbing.

Recreational and professional climbing is gaining popularity. Thus, valid and reliable infield strength monitoring and testing devices are required. This study aims at assessing the validity as well as within- and between-day reliability of two climbing-specific hanging positions for assessing the maximum force with a new force measurement device. Therefore, 25 experienced male (n = 16) and female (n = 9) climbers (age: 25.5 ± 4.2 years, height: 176.0 ± 9.9 cm, weight: 69.7 ± 14.5 kg, body composition: 11.8 ± 5.7% body fat, climbing level: 17.5 ± 3.9 International Rock Climbing Research Association scale) were randomly tested with climbing-specific hang board strength tests (one-handed rung pulling and one-handed bent arm lock-off at 90°). The Tindeq, a load cell-based sensor for assessing different force-related variables, was employed together with a force plate (Kistler Quattro Jump) during both conditions. Data analysis revealed excellent validity for assessment with Tindeq: The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.99 (both positions), while the standard error of the measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and limits of agreement (LoA) showed low values. Within day reliability for the assessment with Tindeq was excellent: rung pulling showed an ICC of 0.90 and arm lock-off an ICC of 0.98; between-day reliability was excellent as well: rung pulling indicated an ICC of 0.95 and arm lock-off an ICC of 0.98. Other reliability indicators such as SEM, CV, and LoA were low. The Tindeq progressor can be applied for the cross-sectional and longitudinal climbing strength assessment as this device can detect training-induced changes reliably.