Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32355236›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2020

Nerve conduction during acute blood-flow restriction with and without low-intensity exercise Nerve conduction and blood-flow restriction.

Goncalo V Mendonca, Miguel Mouro, Carolina Vila-Chã, Pedro Pezarat-Correia

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06574841 (Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Pain Perception, Grip Strength and Nerve Conductivity in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

NCT06574841 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Pain Perception, Grip Strength and Nerve Conductivity in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsCarpal Tunnel SyndromeArmsBlood Flow Restriction training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Goncalo V MendoncaNeuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, 1499-002, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, Portugal. gvmendonca@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8161-8598
Miguel MouroNeuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, 1499-002, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, Portugal.
Carolina Vila-ChãPolytechnic Institute of Guarda, Av. Dr. Francisco Sá Carneiro, n. 50, Guarda, 6300-559, Portugal.
Pedro Pezarat-CorreiaNeuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, 1499-002, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, Portugal.
University of Lisbon · PTInstituto Politécnico da Guarda · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite being apparently safe for most individuals, the impact of low intensity (LI) blood-flow restricted (BFR) exercise on nerve function and integrity is still obscure. We explored whether BFR (with and without exercise) alters the properties of nerve conduction measured at the level of the restricted limb. Thirteen healthy, young men (22.0 ± 1.7 years) were included in this study. Arterial occlusion pressure was taken at rest. Soleus M- and H-recruitment curves were constructed for all participants. H-wave latencies and amplitudes were obtained in three testing conditions (non-BFR vs. 60 vs. 80% BFR) at four different time points: [#1] non-restricted baseline, [#2] time control either with or without BFR, [#3] non-restricted pre-exercise, [#4] LI exercise either with or without BFR. Nerve conduction was estimated using the difference between the latency of H and M wave. BFR did not affect H-wave amplitude, either with or without exercise. The changes in the difference between H- and M-wave latency of over time were similar between all conditions (condition-by-time interaction: F = 0.7, p = 0.47). In conclusion, our data indicate that performing LI exercise with BFR, set at 60 or 80% BFR, does not exert a negative impact on sciatic-tibial nerve function. Thus, from a neurological standpoint, we provide preliminary evidence that LI BFR exercise may be regarded as a safe mode of resistance training in healthy young men.

Indexed as

HemodynamicsMuscle, SkeletalNeural ConductionRegional Blood FlowResistance TrainingAdultHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID32355236
PMCPMC7193597
OpenAlexW3021825969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.