ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Introduction: It is acknowledged that training during recovery periods after injury involves reducing both volume and intensity, often resulting in losses of sportspecific fitness. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of highintensity training (HIT) and low-intensity training with blood flow restriction (LIT + BFR) of the finger flexors in order to preserve climbing-specific strength and endurance. Methods: In a crossover design, thirteen intermediate climbers completed two 5- week periods of isometric finger flexors training on a hangboard. The trainings consisted of ten LIT + BFR (30% of max) or HIT sessions (60% of max without BFR) and were undertaken in a randomized order. The training session consisted of 6 unilateral sets of 1 min intermittent hanging at a 7:3 work relief ratio for both hands. Maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), force impulse from the 4 min all out test (W), critical force (CF) and force impulse above the critical force (W’) of the finger flexors were assessed before, after the first, and after the second training period, using a climbing-specific dynamometer. Forearm muscle oxidative capacity was estimated from an occlusion test using near-infrared spectroscopy at the same time points. Results: Both training methods led to maintaining strength and endurance indicators, however, no interaction (P > 0.05) was found between the training methods for any strength or endurance variable. A significant increase (P = 0.002) was found for W, primarily driven by the HIT group (pretest—25078 ± 7584 N.s, post-test—27327 ± 8051 N.s, P = 0.012, Cohen’s d = 0.29). There were no significant (P > 0.05) pre- post-test changes for MVC (HIT: Cohen’s d = 0.13; LIT + BFR: Cohen’s d = −0.10), CF (HIT: Cohen’s d = 0.36; LIT + BFR = 0.05), W` (HIT: Cohen’s d = −0.03, LIT + BFR = 0.12), and forearm muscle oxidative capacity (HIT: Cohen’s d = −0.23; LIT + BFR: Cohen’s d = −0.07). Conclusions: Low volume of BFR and HIT led to similar results, maintaining climbing-specific strength and endurance in lower grade and intermediate climbers. It appears that using BFR training may be an alternative approach after finger injury as low mechanical impact occurs during training.
Content may be subject to copyright.
EDITED BY
Emiliano Cè,
University of Milan, Italy
REVIEWED BY
Shannon Siegel,
University of San Francisco, United States
Christian Doria,
University of Milan, Italy
*CORRESPONDENCE
Jiří Baláš
balas@ftvs.cuni.cz
RECEIVED 10 July 2023
ACCEPTED 18 September 2023
PUBLISHED 29 September 2023
CITATION
Javorský T, Saeterbakken AH, Andersen V and
BalášJ (2023) Comparing low volume of blood
ow restricted to high-intensity resistance
training of the nger exors to maintain
climbing-specic strength and endurance: a
crossover study.
Front. Sports Act. Living 5:1256136.
doi: 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
COPYRIGHT
© 2023 Javorský, Saeterbakken, Andersen and
Baláš. This is an open-access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
distribution or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original author(s) and
the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the
original publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is
permitted which does not comply with these
terms.
Comparing low volume of blood
ow restricted to high-intensity
resistance training of the nger
exors to maintain
climbing-specic strength and
endurance: a crossover study
TomášJavorský1,2, Atle Hole Saeterbakken3, Vidar Andersen3
and Jiří Baláš1*
1
Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic,
2
Department of
Sport Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria,
3
Faculty of Education, Arts and Sports, Western
Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway
Introduction: It is acknowledged that training during recovery periods after injury
involves reducing both volume and intensity, often resulting in losses of sport-
specictness. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of high-
intensity training (HIT) and low-intensity training with blood ow restriction (LIT
+ BFR) of the nger exors in order to preserve climbing-specic strength and
endurance.
Methods: In a crossover design, thirteen intermediate climbers completed two 5-
week periods of isometric nger exors training on a hangboard. The trainings
consisted of ten LIT + BFR (30% of max) or HIT sessions (60% of max without
BFR) and were undertaken in a randomized order. The training session consisted
of 6 unilateral sets of 1 min intermittent hanging at a 7:3 work relief ratio for
both hands. Maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), force impulse from the 4 min
all out test (W), critical force (CF) and force impulse above the critical force (W)
of the nger exors were assessed before, after the rst, and after the second
training period, using a climbing-specic dynamometer. Forearm muscle
oxidative capacity was estimated from an occlusion test using near-infrared
spectroscopy at the same time points.
Results: Both training methods led to maintaining strength and endurance
indicators, however, no interaction (P> 0.05) was found between the training
methods for any strength or endurance variable. A signicant increase (P=
0.002) was found for W, primarily driven by the HIT group (pretest25078 ±
7584 N.s, post-test27327 ± 8051 N.s, P= 0.012, Cohensd= 0.29). There were
no signicant (P> 0.05) pre- post-test changes for MVC (HIT: Cohensd= 0.13;
LIT + BFR: Cohensd=0.10), CF (HIT: Cohensd= 0.36; LIT + BFR = 0.05), W`
(HIT: Cohensd=0.03, LIT + BFR = 0.12), and forearm muscle oxidative
capacity (HIT: Cohensd=0.23; LIT + BFR: Cohensd=0.07).
Conclusions: Low volume of BFR and HIT led to similar results, maintaining
climbing-specic strength and endurance in lower grade and intermediate
climbers. It appears that using BFR training may be an alternative approach after
nger injury as low mechanical impact occurs during training.
KEYWORDS
injury, hypertrophy, hypoxia, ischemia, intermittent exercise, isometric contraction,
strength, oxidative capacity
TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 29 September 2023
|
DOI 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 01 frontiersin.org
Introduction
Sport climbers heavily rely on nger exor contractions,
making nger exor strength and endurance crucial predictors of
climbing performance (1,2). Previous research has extensively
investigated the physiological adaptations induced by high-
intensity training (HIT) on nger strength and endurance (3,4).
For example, specic maximal strength and hypertrophy training
designed for climbers have demonstrated signicant increases in
nger exor strength and endurance after 510 weeks of training
(58). However, HIT of the nger exors may increase the risk
of injuries in the ngers, hands, elbows, or shoulders, with
chronic injuries being the most common among sport climbers
(9,10). Moreover, when recovering from injuries such as pulley
ruptures or strains it is recommended to gradually increase
training loads (11). Consequently, recovery periods require
climbers to train with decreased intensity, often resulting in
losses of sport-specictness.
An alternative approach to HIT for improving or maintaining
nger strength and muscle hypertrophy is training at low
intensities (typically 20%40% of maximum strength) with blood
ow restriction (LIT + BFR), achieved by applying external
pressure to the limb proximal to the working muscle (12). LIT +
BFR exercise creates a localized hypoxic environment and
promotes recruitment of both types I and II muscle bres,
leading to enhanced muscle strength and power (1315).
Furthermore, changes in key markers of protein synthesis, such
as mTOR and HIF-1, support the observed adaptations in the
muscle following LIT + BFR training (16,17). Accordingly, LIT +
BFR triggers an upregulation of protein synthesis, facilitating
muscle growth and strength gains despite the use of lower
training loads (decreased mechanical stress). This suggests that
the metabolic stress induced by LIT + BFR exercise can stimulate
muscle protein synthesis to a comparable extent as high-intensity
exercise (18,19). To date there are no studies comparing HIT
and LIT + BFR in climbing-specic hangboard resistance training.
However, based on the existing literature, it is reasonable to
hypothesize that LIT + BFR and HIT may yield comparable
effects in nger exors training in climbers.
Previous research has shown that increasing strength can be
achieved with low volume of HIT per week (20,21). However,
it remains unknown whether the same training volume of LIT
+ BFR would yield similar effects. Most studies investigating
blood ow restriction (BFR) interventions have primarily
focused on designs maximizing their effectiveness for increasing
muscle strength and hypertrophy (22,23). However, during the
recovery period following an injury, the primary objective of
training is to maintain strength and endurance levels using
minimal load and training volume (20). Low-intensity training
(LIT) with BFR training has been proposed and utilized as a
method of recovery after various types of injuries in lower
limbs such as knee osteoarthritis (24) or arthroplasty (25),
however, to authors best knowledge, there is not any literature
available on this topic on the upper extremities related to the
climbing.
Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the
effects of low volume of LIT + BFR training and HIT on
maintaining climbing-specic strength and endurance. We
hypothesised that HIT and LIT + BFR will be equally effective in
preserving sport specic strength and endurance in intermediate
climbers.
Methods
Participants
Thirteen lower grade to intermediate climbers [6 male, 7 female
participants: malesage, 24.3 ± 2.0 yrs; climbing ability level 13 ± 4
IRCRA (International Rock Climbing Research Association) grade;
femalesage, 32.6 ± 12.5 yrs; climbing ability 9 ± 2 IRCRA grade]
volunteered to take part in the study. Participants self-reported
their climbing ability using French/Sport grade which was
transformed to the IRCRA difculty scale ranging from 1 to 32
(26). At the beginning, all participants completed written
informed consent forms and medical health questionnaires.
Exclusion criteria included venous thrombosis, cardiovascular
diseases (including high blood pressure and diabetes),
unexplained chest pain, heart pathologies, and fainting during
physical activities. Additionally, participants with carpal tunnel
syndrome, acute upper limb injuries, tendosynovitis, or tendon
injuries in the upper limb, pregnancy, or in the injury recovery
phase were also excluded.
Participants were instructed to abstain from engaging in any
strenuous exercise, consuming caffeine, and consuming alcohol
within 24 h before each experimental testing session.
Furthermore, participants were not allowed to maintain normal
training routine or engage in any nger exor strength and
endurance training. This was achieved partially by the ongoing
COVID lockdown when sport facilities were closed. Additionally,
participants were asked to continue their regular dietary and
supplement habits. The study was approved by Ethics Committee
of Charles University, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport.
The participants provided their written informed consent to
participate in this study.
Experimental protocol
The 13 weeks long experimental protocol is depicted at
Figure 1. All participants completed two 5 weeks periods of
nger exors training in a cross-over randomized order with a 1-
week long washout period. The two training interventions
consisted of either isometric HIT or LIT + BFR on a hangboard.
Testing climbing specic strength and endurance was applied
before and after each period of training (Figure 1).
To eliminate interference between individual tests, the
participants underwent two separate testing sessions during the
testing week. In the rst session, the muscle oxidative capacity
and the maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) were assessed.
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 02 frontiersin.org
The second testing session involved performing a 4-min all-out test
after the measurement of blood pressure to determine the level of
occlusion.
Upon their rst visit, participants were randomly assigned into
two groups based on the training intervention. They were also
familiarized with the laboratory setup. Additionally, they
completed a questionnaire and signed the medical consent form.
In the questionnaire, participants reported their climbing ability
as proposed by Draper et al. (26).
Warm-up
All subjects completed a standardized self-directed warm-up
prior to the assessment and training protocol. The warm-up
consisted of three minutes of pulse-raising activity, such as
jogging or cycling, followed by three minutes of climbing, which
is considered a sport-specic activity. In addition, the warm-up
included a series of 5:5 s work-to-rest ratio hangs on the testing
edge in a half-crimp position at 50% of the perceived
maximum force (27).
Training interventions
Both training interventions consisted of 10 training sessions (2
sessions per week during each 5-week period). The LIT + BFR and
HIT participants previously scheduled a time of the day for the
individual sessions of hangboard strength exercises. The intensity
for each training type was based on the MVC tested prior to
each intervention. The training was performed on the same
wooden rung as for testing MVC and all-out test (see below) in
standing position with arms 180° exed in shoulder, and
slightly exed in elbows. Participants applied the target force on
the rung by hanging (bending the knees). The online feedback of
applied force was visible on the screen of the testing/training
device (1D-SAC, Spacelab, Soa, Bulgaria).
Blood ow restriction training
To implement BFR, we utilized a cuff provided by Occlude
ApS (Aarhaus, Denmark). Prior to each training session, the
cuff was inated to 60% of the complete arterial occlusion
pressure (21,28) on training arm, which caused decrease in
the blood ow in the downstream vascular system by 47%
48% (29). In each session both arms performed 6 sets over
two blocks (one block consisted of three consecutive sets)
unilaterally for each arm, and each set comprising 6
repetitions performed at 30% of MVC, with a work-to-rest
ratio of 7 to 3 s. Following the completion of set 3 (60 s rest in
between) for one arm, the cuff was deated and participants
immediately continued with the other arm for next three sets.
In total, 36 isometric contractions for each arm were
completed (Figure 2). The cuff pressure was monitored and
controlled during the rest periods between sets.
FIGURE 2
Position of participant during the Low-intensity training with the blood
ow restriction.
FIGURE 1
Experimental design of the study.
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 03 frontiersin.org
High-Intensity training
Participants performed HIT sessions at 60% of their MVC. The
same volume of training as for LIT + BFR was applied. Each
training session consisted of 12 working sets (i.e., 6 sets of each
arm divided into two blocks with 5 min rest in between), with
each set comprising 6 repetitions and a work-to-rest ratio of 7 to
3 s. Following the completion of the third set, participants were
given a 5 min recovery period while the other arm was exercising.
Testing climbing specic strength and
endurance
Maximal strength
The maximal strength of the nger exors was determined
using a custom-made dynamometer (1D-SAC, Spacelab, Soa,
Bulgaria). The participant was instructed to maintain a 5 s long
half-crimp position while hangingon the wooden rung. The
rung depth was 23 mm with a 10 mm radius to maximize the
activation of the exor digitorum profundus (FDP) and exor
digitorum supercialis (FDS) (30). Two attempts were performed
separated by a two-minute rest in between. Participants were
instructed to progressively transfer as much of their weight as
possible onto the wooden rung with their dominant arm. The
highest peak value from the two trials was considered as the
MVC of nger exors, and this value was used to determine
relative workloads for the following training intervention.
All-out test
To assess the critical force (CF), force impulse from all
contractions (W), and impulse above the critical force (W), the
4-min all-out test was performed (31). This test involved 24
isometric maximal voluntary contractions on the same rung as
for maximal strength (1D-SAC, Spacelab, Soa, Bulgaria) in a
half crimp position with a 7:3 s work to rest ratio.
During the restphase, participants were instructed to
maintain the anatomical position with upper-limb over the head
level and were not allowed to shake their forearms or hands, as
shaking is known to aid recovery (32). However, participants
could dry their ngers using the chalk. Loud verbal
encouragements were given to all participants to reach their
maximum force during every contraction. Force and time data
were continuously recorded throughout the test. For the visual
representation see Figure 3.
For each contraction in all tests, the length (in seconds), peak
and mean force (in kilograms), and the impulse were
determined. The CF was dened as the mean force from the last
three contractions of the test.
Muscle oxidative capacity
To assess the muscle oxidative capacity, near-infrared
spectroscopy (NIRS) (Portamon, Artinis Medical Systems BV,
The Netherlands) was employed to monitor changes in tissue
oxygenation levels of the FDP. A chartered physiotherapist
located the FDP using the technique recommended by Schweizer
and Hudek (30), where the thumb and rst nger were squeezed
together, and the middle of the muscle belly was palpated (30).
The NIRS device sampling frequency was set to 10 Hz and data
were processed using the Oxysoft software (Artinis Medical
System, BV, The Netherlands). Path length factor was set to
4. Muscle oxidative capacity was estimated by calculating half-
time to recovery of the tissue oxygen saturation (O
2
HTR) after
arterial occlusion (33).
FIGURE 3
Vizualization of data acquired by the all-out test for the nger exors. Critical force was calculated as the average force from the last three contractions.
The duration of the all-out test was 240 s with 7:3 work to rest ratio. Force impulse from all contractions was calculated as the area under the force-time
curve and represents total isometric muscle work during the test (W). Impulse above the critical force represents energy store component (W).
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 04 frontiersin.org
Participants were instructed to rest in a supine position with
their arm elevated above heart level for 20 min after tting the
artery tourniquet. Following the initial measurement of the
baseline, the tourniquet was inated to a supramaximal pressure
of 250 mmHg for 5 min. After that, the cuff was rapidly released,
and recovery muscle tissue oxygen saturation (StO
2
)valueswere
recorded for 3 min. Half-time of StO
2
recovery was calculated,
which represents a valid estimate of oxidative capacity (33).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS for
Windows (IBM Corp. Released 2020. IBM SPSS Statistics for
Windows, Version 27.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Descriptive
statistics (mean ± standard deviation) were used to characterize
strength and endurance indicators during pretest and post-test.
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) 2 × 2 with repeated measures
was conducted to examine the main effects of time (pretest vs.
post-test) and training method (LIT + BFR vs. HIT), as well as
their interaction effect. The signicance level was set at P<0.05.
Post hoc analysis using Bonferroni correction was performed to
compare specic pairs of interventions in terms of their effects on
the pretest and post-test measures. Effect sizes of 0.3, 0.5, and 0.8
were interpreted as small, medium, and large effects, respectively
(34). Utilizing the Shapiro-Wilk test, all data were determined to
be normal and met the criteria of Mauchlys test of sphericity.
Results
At baseline, no differences for were observed between the
training methods for any of the variables (P> 0.05).
There was a signicant main effect of time for impulse (delta
W = + 1568 Ns; P= 0.002). However, there was no signicant
interaction of time and training method demonstrating no
substantial differences between LIT + BFR and HIT (P=0.057
0.855).
Pairwise comparisons showed signicant increases of force
impulse only for HIT method (Table 1,Figure 4). Otherwise,
non-signicant improvements with small or no effect size were
found for all strength and endurance indicators and no
signicant decreases of climbing specic strength or endurance
indicators were demonstrated (Table 1,Figure 4).
Discussion
The main nding of the current study was that small volume
of LIT + BFR was equally effective as HIT to maintain nger
exor strength and endurance in lower grade and intermediate
climbers.
To evaluate maximum nger exor strength, we employed an
ecological setting with the arm positioned overhead without any
xation. This method has been demonstrated to be a valid and
reliable measure of climbing-specic strength, with a standard
error of measurement (SEM) of 35 N (35). Neither the HIT, nor
LIT + BFR interventions resulted in signicant changes in nger
exor strength. The observed pretest-post-test changes fell within
the previously mentioned SEM range. It has been observed that
strength decreases occur rapidly with a training interruption,
becoming more pronounced after 8 days of inactivity (36)Itis
hypothesized that neural factors such as motor unit recruitment
and synchronization, ring frequency, and intramuscular
coordination are responsible for strength losses during the early
stages of inactivity, while morphological factors contribute to
greater strength decreases thereafter (37). Our study
demonstrates that low volume of intermittent isometric HIT
(60% MVC, with a total exercise time of 36 × 10:3 s work: relief
cycles per session, two sessions per week) and an equivalent
volume of low-intensity with BFR (30% MVC) were effective in
maintaining the initial strength level for 5 weeks. All participants
were able to sustain both training protocols without premature
localized exhaustion. Therefore, it may be speculated that 2
sessions per week, with a total of 12 min of isometric non-
exhaustive exercise per arm at low intensity and with BFR,
counteracted the deteriorating changes that neural factors may
have on maximal strength due to inactivity.
During high-intensity resistance training, a single set of 612
repetitions with loads ranging from approximately 70%85% 1
repetition maximum 23 times per week reaching volitional or
momentary failure for 812 weeks can produce suboptimal, yet
signicant increases in squat and bench press strength in
resistance-trained men (20). Our non-exhaustive protocol with
smaller muscle groups, slightly lower intensity, and similar
volume did not result in signicant improvements. It appears
that exhaustive protocols are necessary to induce structural
changes leading to strength increases (38,39). However, a similar
volume of non-exhaustive exercise may have benets in
maintaining the current level of strength.
TABLE 1 Mean standard deviation) score of pretest and post-test measurements for high intensity training (HIT) and low intensity training with blood
ow restrictions (LIT + BFR).
HIT LIT + BFR
Pretest Post-test PCohensdPretest Post-test PCohensd
MVC (N) 356 ± 134 373 ± 113 0.241 0.13 376 ± 138 362 ± 125 0.158 0.10
Cf (N) 103 ± 26 113 ± 30 0.237 0.36 114.3 ± 31 116 ± 30 0.844 0.05
W (N.s) 25,078 ± 7,583 27,327 ± 8,051 0.012 0.29 26,661 ± 8,415 27,551 ± 6,593 0.392 0.12
W(N.s) 10,246 ± 6,011 10,092 ± 5,979 0.845 0.03 9,494 ± 5,278 10,152 ± 5,599 0.353 0.12
O
2
HTR (s) 14.3 ± 5.1 13.1 ± 5.1 0.569 0.23 13.6 ± 4.9 13.2 ± 4.8 0.830 0.07
W, impulse from the 4 min all-out test; W, impulse above the critical force; CF, critical force; O
2
HTR, oxygen saturation ½ time to recovery after arterial occlusion.
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 05 frontiersin.org
FIGURE 4
Boxplot visualization of pretest post-test results. Left panel represent high intensity training (HIT) while right panels represent low intensity training with
blood ow restriction (LIT + BFR) The area of box shows quartile and whiskers represent 1.5 interquartile range between the rst and third quartile. The
line in the middle corresponds to the mean value. Wimpulse, W’—impulse above the critical force, O
2
HTRoxygen ½ time to recovery after occlusion. *
represents signicant improvements from pretest (P< 0.05).
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 06 frontiersin.org
LIT + BFR training does not only have impact on maximal
strength improvements but may also, due to peripheric and central
adaptations, have direct or indirect impact on endurance
performance (40,41). In our study, we estimated endurance of the
nger exors using several indicators: W, W,CFfrom4minall
outtestandO
2
HTR from arterial occlusion test. W is an indicator
of total working capacity and represents an overall measure of
nger strength and endurance. Wis the capacity to release energy
above the CF and is often related to strength-endurance capacity
while the level of CF represents the amount of energy
predominantly released by aerobic metabolism (42). O
2
HTR is a
standardized NIRS derived functional index estimating muscle
aerobic capacity. Faster recovery of FDP has been associated with
increased climbing ability (43). Similar to maximal strength, no
decreases in any endurance indicators were observed. On the
contrary, after HIT, W was statistically higher, suggesting that low
volume of HIT may lead to overall improvement in nger exor
working capacity in intermediate climbers as W represents both
strength and endurance components. However, the effect size for
improvement changes was low, and no differences between the
two methods were found. The maintenance of all endurance
indicators during 5-weeks LIT + BFR training is very promising as
submaximal resistance to fatigue appears to be deteriorated to a
greater extent from training interruption in comparison with
maximal force and maximal power (37).
Endurance adaptations following LIT + BFR training have been
associated with improvements in macro- and microvascular
functions, muscle redox and ionic buffering, and mitochondrial
respiratory capacity (40,41). In our study, the aerobic capacity of
the nger exor muscles was estimated from the NIRS signal. It
is important to note that the sensitivity of StO
2
recovery as a
training indicator in climbers is still unknown, and further
experimental studies are needed to validate its use. Subsequent
studies should also aim to investigate the pathways explaining
forearm oxidative capacity and consider using NIRS technology
to independently assess skeletal muscle oxygen diffusion capacity
and mitochondrial respiratory capacity (44).
There are other strength and limitations to be stated. A
strength of the study is that all participants refrained from
engaging in any climbing-specic or upper-body strength
activities during the 13-week experimental period, ensuring that
any observed changes could be attributed to our experimental
conditions. The intervention may be regarded as a simulation of
a rehabilitation period. Participants were t enough to train
under controlled environment but could not train/climb in an
uncontrolled environment due to lock-down restrictions. The
crossover design allowed for a direct comparison between the
two training modalities within the same group of participants,
minimizing inter-individual variability (45). However, due to
time requirements, a relatively short one-week washout period
between the training interventions was applied. Of note, a
control group was not included which might be useful of
quantifying no strength training or the short washout period.
Nevertheless, this does not seem to inuence our results as no
changes in any indicator were observed after the HIT or LIT +
BFR intervention. The small group size in this study may limit
the generalizability of the ndings and the ability to detect small
differences between the training modalities. Moreover, using BFR
with more advanced climbers may have provided different
results. MVC was assessed only once before each training
intervention to set the training load. In other words, the climbers
trained at the same relative intensity throughout the whole
period. This may also explain the lack of changes during the
different periods. If MVC was tested every week, there may had
been a progression in the training which ultimately may have led
to an increase in (some of) the variables. On the other hand,
during recovery periods from an injury, regular testing of MVC
would increase stress on injured tissues and may slow the
recovery process.
Our ndings support the hypothesis that both approaches, with
and without BFR, were equally effective in preserving the studied
parameters during the minimal training period. However, it is
important to note that physiology of these adaptations may differ
during exercise at 30% of MVC compared to higher intensity
exercise (23,46,47). Therefore, BFR training at a lower intensity
(30% of MVC) appears to be a viable substitute for HIT during
recovery periods and may offer advantages, particularly for
climbers recovering from injuries, although it is more
discomforting and less enjoyable compared to HIT (48).
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that low volume of non-
exhaustive BFR training at a lower intensity can be as effective as
HIT in preserving sport-specic strength and endurance. These
ndings suggest that LIT + BFR training may be a viable
alternative for climbers recovering from injuries.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included
in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be
directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Ethics
Committee of Charles University, Faculty of Physical Education
and Sport. The studies were conducted in accordance with the
local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants
provided their written informed consent to participate in this
study. Written informed consent was obtained from the
individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identiable
images or data included in this article.
Author contributions
TJ: Writing original draft, Conceptualization, Investigation,
Data curation. AS: Writing review & editing, Methodology.
VA: Methodology, Writing review & editing. JB:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing review
& editing.
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 07 frontiersin.org
Funding
The author(s) declare nancial support was received for the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
The study was supported by the grant of Charles University,
Cooperatio Program, research area Sport SciencesBiomedical
and Rehabilitation Medicine. As a university-grant, the funding
did not inuence the design, results, or interpretation of this study.
Conict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or nancial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conict of interest.
Publishers note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their afliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed
or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.
1256136/full#supplementary-material
References
1. Maciejczyk M, Michailov ML, Wiecek M, Szymura J, Rokowski R, Szygula Z, et al.
Climbing-Specic exercise tests: energy system contributions and relationships with
sport performance. Front Physiol. (2022) 12:787902. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.787902
2. Philippe M, Wegst D, Müller T, Raschner C, Burtscher M. Climbing-specic
nger exor performance and forearm muscle oxygenation in elite male and female
sport climbers. Eur J Appl Physiol. (2012) 112(8):283947. doi: 10.1007/s00421-011-
2260-1
3. Langer K, Simon C, Wiemeyer J. Strength training in climbing: a systematic
review. J Strength Cond Res. (2023) 37(3):75167. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004286
4. Thompson EB, Farrow L, Hunt JE, Lewis MP, Ferguson RA. Brachial artery
characteristics and micro-vascular ltration capacity in rock climbers. Eur J Sport
Sci. (2015) 15(4):296304. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2014.940560
5. Hermans E, Saeterbakken AH, Vereide V, Nord ISO, Stien N, Andersen V. The
effects of 10 weeks hangboard training on climbing specic maximal strength,
explosive strength, and nger endurance. Front Sports Act Living. (2022) 4:888158.
doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.888158
6. Levernier G, Laffaye G. Four weeks of nger grip training increases the rate of
force development and the maximal force in elite and top world-ranking climbers.
J Strength Cond Res. (2019) 33(9):247180. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002230
7. López-Rivera E, González-Badillo JJ. Comparison of the effects of three
hangboard strength and endurance training programs on grip endurance in sport
climbers. J Hum Kinet. (2019) 66:18395. doi: 10.2478/hukin-2018-0057
8. Medernach JP, Kleinöder H, Lötzerich HH. Fingerboard in competitive
bouldering: training effects on grip strength and endurance. J Strength Cond Res.
(2015) 29(8):228695. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000873
9. Barrile AM, Feng S, Nesiama J, Huang C. Injury rates, patterns, mechanisms, and
risk factors among competitive youth climbers in the United States. Wilderness
Environ Med. (2022) 33(1):2532. doi: 10.1016/j.wem.2021.09.005
10. Grønhaug G. Self-reported chronic injuries in climbing: who gets injured when ?
Open Sport Exerc Med. (2018) 4(1):16. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000406
11. Lum ZC, Park L. Rock climbing injuries and time to return to sport in the
recreational climber. J Orthop. (2019) 16(4):3613. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2019.04.001
12. Patterson SD, Hughes L, Warmington S, Burr J, Scott BR, Owens J, et al. Blood
ow restriction exercise: considerations of methodology, application, and safety. Front
Physiol. (2019) 10:533. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.00533
13. BjØrnsen T, Wernbom M, Kirketeig A, Paulsen G, SamnØy L, BÆkken L, et al.
Type 1 muscle ber hypertrophy after blood ow-restricted training in powerlifters.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. (2019) 51(2):28898. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001775
14. Reece TM, Godwin JS, Strube MJ, Ciccone AB, Stout KW, Pearson JR, et al.
Myober hypertrophy adaptations following 6 weeks of low-load resistance training
with blood ow restriction in untrained males and females. J Appl Physiol. (2023)
134(5):124055. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00704.2022
15. Wang J, Mogensen AG, Thybo F, Brandbyge M, Brorson J, van Hall G, et al.
Low-load blood ow-restricted resistance exercise produces ber type-independent
hypertrophy and improves muscle functional capacity in older individuals. J Appl
Physiol. (2023) 134(4):104762. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00789.2022
16. Fujita S, Abe T, Drummond MJ, Cadenas JG, Dreyer HC, Sato Y, et al. Blood
ow restriction during low-intensity resistance exercise increases S6K1
phosphorylation and muscle protein synthesis. J Appl Physiol. (2007) 103(3):90310.
doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00195.2007
17. Panzhinskiy E, Culver B, Ren J, Bagchi D, Nair S. Chapter 22 - Role of
mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) in muscle growth. In: Bagchi D, Nair S,
Sen CK, editors. Nutrition and enhanced sports performance. San Diego: Academic
Press (2013). p. 21727. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-396454-0.00022-9
18. Barbieri E, Sestili P. Reactive oxygen Species in skeletal muscle signaling. J Signal
Transduct. (2012) 2012:117. doi: 10.1155/2012/982794
19. Steinbacher P, Eckl P. Impact of oxidative stress on exercising skeletal muscle.
Biomolecules. (2015) 5(2):35677. doi: 10.3390/biom5020356
20. Androulakis P, James K, James PF. The Minimum effective training dose
required to increase 1RM strength in resistance - trained men: a systematic review
and meta - analysis. Sport Med. (2020) 50(4):75165. doi: 10.1007/s40279-019-
01236-0
21. Das A, Paton B. Is there a minimum effective dose for vascular occlusion during
blood ow restriction training? Front Physiol. (2022) 13:838115. doi: 10.3389/fphys.
2022.838115
22. Abe T, Fujita S, Nakajima T, Sakamaki M, Ozaki H, Oga-sawara R, et al. Effects
of low-intensity cycle training with restricted leg blood ow on thigh muscle volume
and VO2max in young men. J Sport Sci Med. (2010) 9(April):4528.
23. Abe T, Kearns CF, Sato Y. Muscle size and strength are increased following walk
training with restricted venous blood ow from the leg muscle, Kaatsu-walk training.
J Appl Physiol. (2006) 100(5):14606. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01267.2005
24. Ferraz RB, Gualano B, Rodrigues R, Kurimori CO, Fuller R, Lima FR, et al.
Benets of resistance training with blood ow restriction in knee osteoarthritis. Med
Sci Sport Exerc. (2018) 50(5):897905. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001530
25. Franz A, Ji S, Bittersohl B, Zilkens C, Behringer M. Impact of a six-week
prehabilitation with blood-ow restriction training on pre- and postoperative
skeletal muscle mass and strength in patients receiving primary total knee
arthroplasty. Front Physiol. (2022) 13:881484. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2022.881484
26. Draper N, Giles D, SchöfV, Fuss FK, Watts PB, Wolf P, et al. Comparative
grading scales, statistical analyses, climber descriptors and ability grouping:
international rock climbing research association position statement. Sports Technol.
(2016) 8(3-4):8894. doi: 10.1080/19346182.2015.1107081
27. BalášJ, Kodejška J, Krupková D, Hannsmann J, Fryer S. Reliability of near-
infrared spectroscopy for measuring intermittent handgrip contractions in sport
climbers. J Strength Cond Res. (2018) 32(2):494501. doi: 10.1519/JSC.
0000000000002341
28. Sieljacks P, Matzon A, Wernbom M, Ringgaard S, Vissing K, Overgaard K.
Muscle damage and repeated bout effect following blood ow restricted exercise.
Eur J Appl Physiol. (2016) 116(3):51325. doi: 10.1007/s00421-015-3304-8
29. Singer TJ, Stavres J, Elmer SJ, Kilgas MA, Pollock BS, Kearney SG, et al. Knee
extension with blood ow restriction : impact of cuff pressure on hemodynamic s.
Eur J Appl Physiol. (2020) 120(1):7990. doi: 10.1007/s00421-019-04250-2
30. Schweizer A, Hudek R. Kinetics of crimp and slope grip in rock climbing. J Appl
Biomech. (2011) 27(2):11621. doi: 10.1123/jab.27.2.116
31. Giles D, Hartley C, Maslen H, Hadley J, Taylor N, Torr O, et al. An all-out test to
determine nger exor critical force in rock climbers. Int J Sports Physiol Perform.
(2021) 16(7):9429. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2020-0637
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 08 frontiersin.org
32. BalášJ, Michailov M, Giles D, Kodejška J, Panáčková M, Fryer S, et al. Active
recovery of the nger exors enhances intermittent handgrip performance in rock
climbers performance in rock climbers. Eur J Sport Sci. (2016) 16(7):76472.
doi: 10.1080/17461391.2015.1119198
33. Fryer S, Stoner L, Giles KSD, Sveen J, Garrido I. Forearm muscle oxidative
capacity index predicts sport rock - climbing performance. Eur J Appl Physiol.
(2016) 116(8):147984. doi: 10.1007/s00421-016-3403-1
34. Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a
practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. (2013) 4:863. doi: 10.3389/
fpsyg.2013.00863
35. Michailov ML, BalášJ, Tanev SK, Stoyanov H, Kodejška J, Brown L. Reliability
and validity of nger strength and endurance measurements in rock climbing
reliability and validity of nger strength and endurance measurements in rock. Res
Q Exerc Sport. (2018) 89(2):24654. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2018.1441484
36. Wortman RJ, Brown SM, Savage-elliott I, Finley ZJ, Mulcahey MK. Blood ow
restriction training for athletes: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med. (2021) 49
(7):193844. doi: 10.1177/0363546520964454
37. Bosquet L, Berryman N, Dupuy O, Mekary S, Arvisais D, Bherer L, et al. Effect of
training cessation on muscular performance: a meta-analysis. Scand J Med Sci Sports.
(2013) 23(3):e1409. doi: 10.1111/sms.12047
38. Hermans E, Andersen V, Saeterbakken AH. The effects of high resistance-few
repetitions and low resistance-high repetitions resistance training on climbing
performance. Eur J Sport Sci. (2017) 17(4):37885. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2016.1248499
39. Schoenfeld BJ, Wilson JM, Lowery RP, Krieger JW. Muscular adaptations in low-
versus high-load resistance training: a meta-analysis. Eur J Sport Sci. (2016) 16
(1):110. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2014.989922
40. Horiuchi M, Stoner L, Poles J. The effect of four weeks blood ow restricted
resistance training on macro - and micro - vascular function in healthy, young
men. Eur J Appl Physiol. (2023) 123:217989. doi: 10.1007/s00421-023-05230-3
41. Pignanelli C, Petrick HL, Keyvani F, Heigenhauser GJF, Quadrilatero J,
Holloway GP, et al. Low-load resistance training to task failure with and without
blood ow restriction: muscular functional and structural adaptations. Am
J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. (2020) 318(2):R28495. doi: 10.1152/ajpregu.
00243.2019
42. Giles D, Chidley JB, Taylor N, Torr O, Hadley J, Randall T, et al. The
determination of nger-exor critical force in rock climbers. Int J Sports Physiol
Perform. (2019) 14(7):9729. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2018-0809
43. Fryer S, Stone KJ, Sveen J, Dickson T, Giles D, BalášJ, et al. Differences in
forearm strength, endurance, and hemodynamic kinetics between male boulderers
and lead rock climbers. Eur J Sport Sci. (2017) 17(9):117783. doi: 10.1080/
17461391.2017.1353135
44. Pilotto AM, Adami A, Mazzolari R, Brocca L, Crea E, Zuccarelli L, et al.
Near-infrared spectroscopy estimation of combined skeletal muscle oxidative
capacity and O2 diffusion capacity in humans. J Physiol. (2022) 18:415368. doi: 10.
1113/JP283267
45. Nolan SJ, Hambleton I, Dwan K. The use and reporting of the cross-over study
design in clinical trials and systematic reviews: a systematic assessment. Plos One.
(2016) 69:114. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159014
46. Cook SB, Scott BR, Hayes KL, Murphy BG. Neuromuscular adaptations to
low-load blood ow restricted resistance training. J Sports Sci Med. (2018) 17
(1):6673.
47. Ratamess NA, Brent A, Evetoch TK, Housh TJ. Progression models in resistance
training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sport Exerc. (2009) 41(3):687708. doi: 10.1249/
MSS.0b013e3181915670
48. Andersen V, Hermans E, Vereide V, Stien N, Paulsen G, BalášJ, et al.
Comparison of nger exor resistance training, with and without blood ow
restriction, on perceptional and physiological responses in advanced climbers. Sci
Rep. (2023) 13(1):3287. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-30499-x
Javorský et al. 10.3389/fspor.2023.1256136
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 09 frontiersin.org
... The authors demonstrated similar results, comparing the tests with or without BFR [15]. Recently, a five week low-load BFR training (30% of max) twice per week maintained isometric finger flexor strength and endurance in climbers [98]. Since climbing necessarily restricts or reduces upper body blood flow (arms over head, highintensity finger flexor activation), training interventions using BFR to enhance performance (e.g., improve muscle hypertrophy and/or strength), or to reduce the mechanical stress on the fingers (e.g., result in greater climbing volume), should be examined. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Climbing is an intricate sport composed of various disciplines, holds, styles, distances between holds, and levels of difficulty. In highly skilled climbers the potential for further strength-specific adaptations to increase performance may be marginal in elite climbers. With an eye on the upcoming 2024 Paris Olympics, more climbers are trying to maximize performance and improve training strategies. The relationships between muscular strength and climbing performance, as well as the role of strength in injury prevention, remain to be fully elucidated. This narrative review seeks to discuss the current literature regarding the effect of resistance training in improving maximal strength, muscle hypertrophy, muscular power, and local muscular endurance on climbing performance, and as a strategy to prevent injuries. Main Body Since sport climbing requires exerting forces against gravity to maintain grip and move the body along the route, it is generally accepted that a climber`s absolute and relative muscular strength are important for climbing performance. Performance characteristics of forearm flexor muscles (hang-time on ledge, force output, rate of force development, and oxidative capacity) discriminate between climbing performance level, climbing styles, and between climbers and non-climbers. Strength of the hand and wrist flexors, shoulders and upper limbs has gained much attention in the scientific literature, and it has been suggested that both general and specific strength training should be part of a climber`s training program. Furthermore, the ability to generate sub-maximal force in different work-rest ratios has proved useful, in examining finger flexor endurance capacity while trying to mimic real-world climbing demands. Importantly, fingers and shoulders are the most frequent injury locations in climbing. Due to the high mechanical stress and load on the finger flexors, fingerboard and campus board training should be limited in lower-graded climbers. Coaches should address, acknowledge, and screen for amenorrhea and disordered eating in climbers. Conclusion Structured low-volume high-resistance training, twice per week hanging from small ledges or a fingerboard, is a feasible approach for climbers. The current injury prevention training aims to increase the level of performance through building tolerance to performance-relevant load exposure and promoting this approach in the climbing field.
Article
Background: Compression garments, i.e. elastic garments with an engineered compression gradient, are widely used in rehabilitation and sport. It is used in sport to improve performance and reduce discomfort during exercise and lower the risk of injury. However, the question of the actual effectiveness of this type of support is controversial, and there is little research in the field of sport climbing, The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of forearm compression garments on the performance of climbing-specific exercises. Methods: Eleven elite climbers (35.97.8 years, 177.77.1 cm and 70.37.9 kg, IRCRA climbing level 24.61.9) took part in a placebo-controlled cross-over design study. The climbers used compression or placebo sleeves, while performing two trials: an intermittent campus board exercise (‘reaches’) and a traverse climb. During the trials, the number of repetitions and, during the campus board trial, maximum and average power were recorded. Power measurements were taken using a Gyko inertial sensor. Results: Under compression, statistically significant differences were only observed for the subjective sensation of forearm ‘pump’ on the campus board trial (p=0.007, ES=0.64). In the placebo condition, the total number of “reaches” on the campus board, as well as the number of interceptions and time spent on the traverse were statistically significantly lower compared to baseline (respectively, p=0.032, ES=0.74; p=0. 025, ES=0.49 and p=0.013, ES=0.64). Conclusion: For elite climbers performing specific climbing activities, forearm compression doesn’t significantly improve their performance compared to baseline, but it can prevent it from deteriorating to some extent.
Article
Full-text available
PurposeTo determine the macrovascular and microvascular function responses to resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) compared to high-load resistance training (HLRT) control group. Methods Twenty-four young, healthy men were randomly assigned to BFR or HLRT. Participants performed bilateral knee extensions and leg presses 4 days per week, for 4 weeks. For each exercise, BFR completed 3 X 10 repetitions/day at 30% of 1-repetition max (RM). The occlusive pressure was applied at 1.3 times of individual systolic blood pressure. The exercise prescription was identical for HLRT, except the intensity was set at 75% of one repetition maximum. Outcomes were measured pre-, at 2- and 4-weeks during the training period. The primary macrovascular function outcome was heart-ankle pulse wave velocity (haPWV), and the primary microvascular function outcome was tissue oxygen saturation (StO2) area under the curve (AUC) response to reactive hyperemia.ResultsKnee extension and leg press 1-RM increased by 14% for both groups. There was a significant interaction effect for haPWV, decreasing − 5% (Δ−0.32 m/s, 95% confidential interval [CI] − 0.51 to – 0.12, effect size [ES] = − 0.53) for BFR and increasing 1% (Δ0.03 m/s, 95%CI − 0.17 to 0.23, ES = 0.05) for HLRT. Similarly, there was an interaction effect for StO2 AUC, increasing 5% (Δ47%・s, 95%CI − 3.07 to 98.1, ES = 0.28) for HLRT and 17% (Δ159%・s, 95%CI 108.23–209.37, ES = 0.93) for BFR group.Conclusion The current findings suggest that BFR may improve macro- and microvascular function compared to HLRT.
Article
Full-text available
The effects of low load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) on hypertrophy of type I/II myofibers remains unclear, especially in females. The purpose of the present study is to examine changes in type I/II myofiber cross-sectional area (fCSA) and muscle CSA (mCSA) of the vastus lateralis (VL) pre- to post-6 weeks of high load resistance training (HL, n=15, 8 females) and low load resistance training with BFR (n=16, 8 females). Mixed-effects models were used to analyze fCSA with group (HL, BFR), sex (M, F), fiber type (I, II), and time (Pre-, Post-) included as factors. mCSA increased pre- to post-training (p<0.001, d=0.91) and was greater in males compared to females (p<0.001, d=2.26). Type II fCSA increased pre- to post-HL (p<0.05, d=0.46) and was greater in males compared to females (p<0.05, d=0.78). There were no significant increases in fCSA pre- to post-BFR for either fiber type or sex. Cohen's d, however, revealed moderate effect sizes in type I and II fCSA for males (d=0.59 & 0.67), although this did not hold true for females (d=0.29 & 0.34). Conversely, the increase in type II fCSA was greater for females than males following HL. In conclusion, low load resistance training with BFR may not promote myofiber hypertrophy to the level of HL resistance training, and similar responses were generally observed for males and females. In contrast, comparable effect sizes for mCSA and 1RM between groups suggest that BFR could play a role in a resistance training program.
Article
Full-text available
This study compared perceptional and physiological responses of finger flexor exercise performed with free flow and blood flow restriction (BFR). Thirteen male advanced climbers completed three sessions of finger flexor resistance exercise at (1) 40% of MVC (Low) and (2) 75% of MVC (High) and (3) BFR at 40% of MVC (Low + BFR) in a randomized and counterbalanced order. Rate of perceived exertion for effort (RPE) and discomfort (RPD), session pleasure/displeasure (sPDF), exercise enjoyment (EES), lactate concentration and oxygen saturation were recorded after the last set. Both low-intensity sessions induced higher RPD than High (p = 0.018–0.022, ES = 1.01–1.09) and High was perceived as more enjoyable than Low-BFR (p = 0.031, ES = 1.08). No differences were found for RPE or sPDF (p = 0.132–0.804). Lactate was elevated more after High than the Low-sessions (p < 0.001, ES = 1.88–2.08). Capillary oxygen saturation was lower after Low + BFR compared to the other sessions (p = 0.031, ES = 1.04–1.27). Finally, the exercise volume was greater in Low compared to High (p = 0.022, ES = 1.14) and Low + BFR (p = 0.020, ES = 0.77). In conclusion, among advanced male climbers, performing Low + BFR led to a similar exercise volume but was perceived as more discomforting and less enjoyable compared to High. The Low session yielded similar responses as the Low + BFR but required a much greater exercise volume.
Article
Full-text available
The final steps of the O2 cascade during exercise depend on the product of the microvascular‐to‐intramyocyte PO2PO2{P}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{\rm{2}}} difference and muscle O2 diffusing capacity (DmO2DmO2D{{\rm{m}}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_2}). Non‐invasive methods to determine DmO2DmO2D{{\rm{m}}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_2} in humans are currently unavailable. Muscle oxygen uptake (mV̇O2V˙O2{\dot{V}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{\rm{2}}}) recovery rate constant (k), measured by near‐infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) using intermittent arterial occlusions, is associated with muscle oxidative capacity in vivo. We reasoned that k would be limited by DmO2DmO2D{{\rm{m}}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_2} when muscle oxygenation is low (kLOW), and hypothesized that: (i) k in well oxygenated muscle (kHIGH) is associated with maximal O2 flux in fibre bundles; and (ii) ∆k (kHIGH – kLOW) is associated with capillary density (CD). Vastus lateralis k was measured in 12 participants using NIRS after moderate exercise. The timing and duration of arterial occlusions were manipulated to maintain tissue saturation index within a 10% range either below (LOW) or above (HIGH) half‐maximal desaturation, assessed during sustained arterial occlusion. Maximal O2 flux in phosphorylating state was 37.7 ± 10.6 pmol s⁻¹ mg⁻¹ (∼5.8 ml min⁻¹ 100 g⁻¹). CD ranged 348 to 586 mm–2. kHIGH was greater than kLOW (3.15 ± 0.45 vs. 1.56 ± 0.79 min–1, P < 0.001). Maximal O2 flux was correlated with kHIGH (r = 0.80, P = 0.002) but not kLOW (r = –0.10, P = 0.755). Δk ranged –0.26 to –2.55 min–1, and correlated with CD (r = –0.68, P = 0.015). mV̇O2V˙O2{\dot{V}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{\rm{2}}} k reflects muscle oxidative capacity only in well oxygenated muscle. ∆k, the difference in k between well and poorly oxygenated muscle, was associated with CD, a mediator of DmO2DmO2D{{\rm{m}}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_2}. Assessment of muscle k and ∆k using NIRS provides a non‐invasive window on muscle oxidative and O2 diffusing capacity. image Key points We determined post‐exercise recovery kinetics of quadriceps muscle oxygen uptake (mV̇O2V˙O2{\dot{V}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{\rm{2}}}) measured by near‐infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) in humans under conditions of both non‐limiting (HIGH) and limiting (LOW) O2 availability, for comparison with biopsy variables. The mV̇O2V˙O2{\dot{V}}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{\rm{2}}} recovery rate constant in HIGH O2 availability was hypothesized to reflect muscle oxidative capacity (kHIGH) and the difference in k between HIGH and LOW O2 availability (∆k) was hypothesized to reflect muscle O2 diffusing capacity. kHIGH was correlated with phosphorylating oxidative capacity of permeabilized muscle fibre bundles (r = 0.80). ∆k was negatively correlated with capillary density (r = −0.68) of biopsy samples. NIRS provides non‐invasive means of assessing both muscle oxidative and oxygen diffusing capacity in vivo.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most successful interventions in gonarthrosis, however the operation is leading to muscle atrophy and long-term muscular deficits. To enhance rehabilitation after TKA, exercise programs try to improve muscle function preoperatively, called prehabilitation. Blood-Flow-Restriction Exercises (BFRE) is a training method which is characterized by using tourniquets to reduce arterial and occlude venous blood flow simultaneously during the exercise to increase metabolic stress. The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of a 6-week prehabilitation with BFR on pre- and postoperative muscle mass, strength, and quality of life (QoL). Methods: 30 patients with end-stage gonarthrosis participated in this study. Patients were randomized into one of three groups: 1) Control-Group (CON): Standard clinical approach without prehabilitation. 2) Active-Control-Group (AC): Participation in a prehabilitation with sham-BFR. 3) BFR-Group (BFR): Participation in a prehabilitation with BFR. The prehabilitation protocol consist of a cycling-ergometer-based training performed twice per week over 6 weeks. During exercise, BFR was applied periodically three times per leg with a pressure of 40% of the individual-limb-occlusion-pressure. Measurement time points were six- (baseline), 3-weeks and 5-days before the surgery (Pre-OP), as well as three- and 6-months postoperatively. Outcome measures were muscular strength of the thigh muscles, thigh circumference as well as QoL and functional activity, examined by 6-min walking- and chair rising test. Results: Both training groups indicated significantly improved leg muscle strength following the prehabilitation period with a superior effect for the BFR-group (BFR: ∼170% vs. AC: ∼91%, p < 0.05). No significant changes in leg strength occurred in the CON (∼3%, p = 0.100). Further, patients in BFR-group indicated significantly improved skeletal muscle mass assessed by femoral circumference following prehabilitation period (∼7%, p < 0.05), while no significant changes occurred in the CON (−1.14%, p = 0.131) and AC-group (∼3%, p = 0.078). At 3-months Post-OP, the CON and BFR-group revealed a significant decrease in femoral circumference compared to the Pre-OP (CON: ∼3%, BFR: ∼4%; p < 0.05), but BFR-group remained above the baseline level (∼3%, p < 0.05). No significant change in femoral circumference was found for AC-group (∼2%, p = 0.078). In addition, the prehabilitation with BFR provided notably improved Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) especially in pain perception with significant higher effect compared to other groups (CON: −2%, AC: 13%, BFR: 41%; p < 0.05). In long-term rehabilitation after 6-months, all groups showed significantly improved KOOS scores in all dimensions (CON: ∼110%, AC: ∼132%, BFR: ∼225%; p < 0.01), and functional examinations (CON: ∼26%, AC: ∼16%, BFR: ∼53%; p < 0.01). Conclusion: The present findings show that BFR-prehabilitation induce significant improvements in muscle function and QoL before TKA surgery. In addition, the supporting effect of prehabilitation on postoperative regeneration and QoL should be highlighted, illustrating prolonged beneficial effects of BFR on muscular and functional performance in a “better in, better out”-manner.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of 10 weeks of hangboard training (HBT) on climbing-specific maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscular endurance. In total, 35 intermediate-to advanced-level climbers (8 women and 27 men) were randomized into a hangboard training group (HBT) or a control group (CON). The HBT program consisted of two sessions of 48 min per week using the Beastmaker 1000 series hangboard, and the following application to smartphone. Both groups continued their normal climbing training routines. Pre-and post-intervention, maximal peak force, maximal average force, and rate of force development (RFD) were measured while performing an isometric pull-up on a 23 mm deep campus rung and jug holds. In addition, finger endurance was measured by performing a sustained dead-hang test on the same rung. The HBT increased peak force and average force in 23 mm rung condition, average force in jug condition, and utilization rate øl,.-in peak force to a greater extent than CON (p = 0.001-0.031, ES = 0.29-0.66), whereas no differences were detected between groups in RFD (jug or 23 mm), peak force in jug condition, utilization rate in RFD, average force or in dead-hang duration (p = 0.056-0.303). At post-test, the HBT group demonstrated 17, 18, 28, 10, 11, and 12% improvement in peak force, average force, RFD in 23 mm rung condition, average force in jug condition, utilization rate in peak force, and dead-hang duration, respectively [p = 0.001-0.006, effect size (ES) = 0.73-1.12] whereas no change was observed in CON (p = 0.213-0.396). In conclusion, 10 weeks of HBT in addition to regular climbing was highly effective for increasing maximal finger strength compared with continuing regular climbing training for intermediate and advanced climbers.
Article
Full-text available
Background Blood flow restriction (BFR) training at lower exercise intensities has a range of applications, allowing subjects to achieve strength and hypertrophy gains matching those training at high intensity. However, there is no clear consensus on the percentage of limb occlusion pressure [%LOP, expressed as a % of the pressure required to occlude systolic blood pressure (SBP)] and percentage of one repetition max weight (%1RM) required to achieve these results. This review aims to explore what the optimal and minimal combination of LOP and 1RM is for significant results using BFR. Method A literature search using PubMed, Scopus, Wiley Online, Springer Link, and relevant citations from review papers was performed, and articles assessed for suitability. Original studies using BFR with a resistance training exercise intervention, who chose a set %LOP and %1RM and compared to a non-BFR control were included in this review. Result Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. %LOP ranged from 40 to 150%. %1RM used ranged from 15 to 80%. Training at 1RM ≤20%, or ≥ 80% did not produce significant strength results compared to controls. Applying %LOP of ≤50% and ≥ 80% did not produce significant strength improvement compared to controls. This may be due to a mechanism mediated by lactate accumulation, which is facilitated by increased training volume and a moderate exercise intensity. Conclusion Training at a minimum of 30 %1RM with BFR is required for strength gains matching non-BFR high intensity training. Moderate intensity training (40–60%1RM) with BFR may produce results exceeding non-BFR high intensity however the literature is sparse. A %LOP of 50–80% is optimal for BFR training.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction Competitive rock climbing is a fast-growing sport. Despite comprehensive reviews on adult climbing-related injuries, few pediatric-specific reviews exist, and studies exclusively on competitive youth climbers are needed. Objectives of this study include 1) estimating the injury rate (IR); 2) describing injury patterns and mechanisms; and 3) identifying injury risk factors in competitive youth climbers. Methods The study design was cross-sectional. Competitive youth climbers were included. Participants completed an anonymous questionnaire to document climbing injuries over the preceding 12 mo. Demographic data and data regarding injuries were collected. The IR was calculated. Analyses were performed to assess association between injury and multiple variables. Multivariate logistic regression was completed for significant variables to control for exposure time. Results The IR was 2.7 injuries per 1000 climbing hours. Hand/Finger injuries were most frequent; chronic overuse was the most common etiology. Injury severity was low overall. Risk factors significantly associated with climbing injury were climbing discipline (bouldering > sport/lead climbing), return to climbing while still in pain, finger taping, higher number of hours climbed per session and per year, climbing at higher bouldering difficulties, and unsupervised climbing. Conclusions The IR in competitive youth climbers was found to be lower than previously reported but higher than suggested by adult studies or those that exclude chronic injuries. Findings are consistent with types, severity, and mechanisms reported in other studies. Modifiable risk factors, especially return to climbing while still injured, warrant further prospective investigation.
Article
Low-load blood flow-restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) constitute an effective means to produce skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Nonetheless, its applicability to counteract the age-related skeletal muscle decay at a cellular level, is not clear. Therefore, we investigated the effect of BFRRE on muscle fiber morphology, integrated muscle protein synthesis, muscle stem cells (MuSCs), myonuclear content and muscle functional capacity in healthy older individuals. Twenty-three participants with a mean age of 66 years (56-75 years) were randomized to six weeks of supervised BFRRE (3 sessions x week) or non-intervention control (CON). Biopsies were collected from vastus lateralis before and after the intervention. Immunofluorescent microscopy was utilized to assess muscle fiber type-specific cross-sectional area (CSA) as well as MuSC and myonuclear content. Deuterium oxide was orally administered throughout the intervention period, enabling assessment of integrated myofibrillar and connective tissue protein fractional synthesis rate (FSR). BFRRE produced uniform ~20% increases in the fiber CSA of both type I and type II fibers (p<0.05). This occurred concomitantly with improvements in both maximal strength and muscle strength-endurance, but in the absence of increased MuSC content and myonuclear addition. The observed muscle fiber hypertrophy was not mirrored by increases in either myofibrillar or connective tissue FSR. In conclusion, BFRRE proved effective in stimulating skeletal muscle growth and increased muscle function in older individuals, which advocates for the use of BFRRE as a countermeasure of age-related deterioration of skeletal muscle mass and function.
Article
The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the state of research on strength training in climbing and to answer the question how climbing performance, maximum grip strength, upper-limb strength endurance, maximum upper-limb strength, and upper-limb power as dependent variables are affected by different types of training. Moreover, we addressed the question which training methods and training parameters are most effective in increasing climbing and bouldering performance. Searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), SPORTDiscus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar were conducted for studies that met the following criteria: (a) examining effects of training on at least one of the dependent variables, (b) controlled longitudinal design with pretest and posttest, and (c) detailed information on training parameters and subjects. Twelve studies were included into the review. The quality of the studies was rated according to the PEDro scale, and the training interventions were classified according to training method (maximum strength [MS], hypertrophy [HYP], and endurance [END]), specificity (specific, semispecific, and unspecific), and static or dynamic exercises. For 9 of the 12 studies, effect sizes were calculated and the treatments compared. The results showed (a) positive effects of strength training on all variables, (b) a trend toward a mixture of MS and HYP or END training, (c) a trend toward semispecific exercise, and (d) similar effects for dynamic and static exercise with a trend toward a mixture of both. Coaches and athletes are recommended to combine static and dynamic semispecific exercises in a HYP and MS or END training. Key Words: performance, specificity, training methods, strength endurance, power, grip strength