Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28501908›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2017

A tale of three cuffs: the hemodynamics of blood flow restriction.

J Grant Mouser, Scott J Dankel, Matthew B Jessee, Kevin T Mattocks, Samuel L Buckner, Brittany R Counts, Jeremy P Loenneke

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J Grant MouserDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Scott J DankelDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Matthew B JesseeDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Kevin T MattocksDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Samuel L BucknerDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Brittany R CountsIntegrative Muscle Biology Laboratory, Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Jeremy P LoennekeDepartment of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA. jploenne@olemiss.edu.
University of Mississippi · USUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe blood flow response to relative levels of blood flow restriction (BFR) across varying cuff widths is not well documented. With the variety of cuff widths and pressures reported in the literature, the effects of different cuffs and pressures on blood flow require investigation. PURPOSE: To measure blood pressure using three commonly used BFR cuffs, examine possible venous/arterial restriction pressures, and measure hemodynamic responses to relative levels of BFR using these same cuffs.

methods43 participants (Experiment 1, brachial artery blood pressure assessed) and 38 participants (Experiment 2, brachial artery blood flow assessed using ultrasound, cuff placed at proximal portion of arm) volunteered for this study.

resultsBlood pressure measurement was higher in the 5 cm cuff than in the 10 and 12 cm cuffs. Sub-diastolic relative pressures appear to occur predominantly at <60% of arterial occlusion pressure (AOP). Blood flow under relative levels of restriction decreases in a non-linear fashion, with minimal differences between cuffs [resting: 50.3 (44.2) ml min

conclusionsUnder relative levels of restriction, pressures from 40 to 90% of AOP appear to decrease blood flow to a similar degree in these three cuffs. Relative pressures appear to elicit a similar blood flow stimulus when accounting for cuff width and participant characteristics.

Indexed as

Blood Flow VelocityBlood PressureAdultArmBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure MonitorsFemaleHumansMaleArterial flowBlood velocityOcclusion trainingShear rateUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID28501908
OpenAlexW2614075088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.