Back to Authors

Szymanski, Elijah

A5111219290 | I204308271

Mayo Clinic

Medical College of Wisconsin

Citations 2

Acute Responses of Low-Load Resistance Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction

Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology | December 4, 2024 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 254

10.3390/jfmk9040254 | PMID 39728238

Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a popular resistance exercise technique purported to increase metabolic stress and augment training adaptations over time. However, short-term use may lead to acute neuromuscular fatigue and higher exertion ratings. Objective: The purpose of the current study was to examine acute physiological responses to low-load resistance exercise utilizing BFR compared to higher-load, non-BFR resistance exercise. Methods: Recreationally trained males (n = 6) and females (n = 7) (mean ± standard deviation, age: 20 ± 1 yrs.; height: 172 ± 8 cm; weight: 73 ± 11 kg; BMI: 24.4 ± 2.2 kg·m−2; training experience: 4 ± 2 yrs.) had limb occlusion pressure determined (50%; right leg: 118 ± 11 mmHg; left leg: 121 ± 13 mmHg) using an automated, self-inflating cuff system during baseline testing. In subsequent sessions, using a randomized, cross-over design, participants completed one of two experimental conditions: (1) Low-load + BFR and (2) High load + non-BFR. In both conditions, participants completed one set of back squats at either 30% (BFR) or 60% (non-BFR) of an estimated 1RM for a max of 30 repetitions, followed by three additional sets with the same loads and a target of 15 repetitions per set. Blood lactate and countermovement jump (CMJ) height were measured pre- and post-back squat. Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were assessed following each set. Results: When collapsed across all sets, participants completed significantly more total repetitions in the BFR condition compared to non-BFR (75.0 ± 0.0 vs. 68.23 ± 9.27 reps; p = 0.015; ES: 1.03), but a lower training load volume (2380 ± 728 vs. 4756 ± 1538 kg; p < 0.001; ES: 1.97). There was a significant time-by-condition interaction (p < 0.001), with a greater increase in blood lactate occurring from baseline to post-back squat in the non-BFR condition (11.61 mmol/L, 95%CI: 9.93, 13.28 mmol/L) compared to BFR (5.98 mmol/L, 95%CI: 4.30, 7.65 mmol/L). There was another significant time-by-condition interaction (p = 0.043), with a greater reduction in CMJ occurring in the non-BFR condition (−6.01, 95%CI: −9.14, −2.88 cm; p < 0.001) compared to BFR (−1.50, 95%CI: −1.50, 4.51 cm; p = 0.312). Conclusions: Utilizing a low-load BFR protocol may allow for a higher training volume, yet lower metabolic stress and reduce neuromuscular fatigue compared to lifting at a higher load without the use of BFR.
Examining Changes in Shoulder Strength, Lower Body Power, and Body Composition among Collegiate Baseball Players after Completion of a Summer Baseball League Season

Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology | June 3, 2024 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 98

10.3390/jfmk9020098 | PMID 38921634

The strength of the shoulder musculature involved with internal rotation and arm extension plays an important role in the overhead throwing motion for baseball athletes, both for throwing-related performance and injury risk. The maintenance of shoulder strength is a high priority for baseball athletes throughout a season; however, little is known in regards to the expected changes in strength throughout a season. To examine pre-post changes in shoulder strength, lower body power, and body composition among collegiate baseball players after the completion of a summer baseball league season. Amateur baseball players (n = 12; age: 20.9 ± 1.0 years.; height: 181.6 ± 5.6 cm; body mass: 86.4 ± 11.1 kg; BMI: 26.0 ± 2.6 kg/m2) participated in the current study. Pre- and post-competitive season, the participants completed shoulder strength assessments and body composition and countermovement vertical jump (CMJ) tests. An upper-body isometric test (athletic shoulder [ASH] test) was used to evaluate shoulder strength for each arm. Each subject completed maximal isometric contractions for both the throwing and non-throwing arms at four separate angles of abduction (180°, ‘I’; 135°, ‘Y’; 90°, ‘T’; and −180°, ‘A’) while lying in a prone position. For shoulder strength, the primary dependent variable of interest was a composite measure that represented the average of the forces produced across all four positions of the ASH test (I, Y, T, A). For the ASH test composite measure, there was a trend toward a significant arm-by-time interaction effect (p = 0.08), as shoulder strength decreased by 9.03% for the throwing arm (ES = 0.72; 95% CI = [−0.27, −0.01]), compared to only 2.03% for the non-throwing arm (ES = 0.15; 95% CI = [−0.16, 0.09]), over the course of the season. The main effects of time (p = 0.16) and arm (p = 0.58) were not significant for the ASH test composite measure. There was no relationship between lower body power and throwing arm strength at baseline (r = 0.20, p = 0.56), and only a non-significant weak relationship at post-test (r = 0.28, p = 0.41). Throughout a season, baseball players may experience reductions in shoulder strength of the throwing arm with minimal changes in shoulder strength in the non-throwing arm.