ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2023
No Differences in Exercise Performance, Perceptual Response, or Safety Were Observed Among 3 Blood Flow Restriction Devices.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of short-term blood flow restriction training on knee function and quality of life in older adults patients with tibial plateau fractures.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Impact of blood flow restriction cuff design on upper body exercise: A randomized crossover trial in resistance-trained adults.Physiological reports · 2025Trial
- Pressure prescription in blood flow restriction training: evaluating the role of arterial occlusion pressure.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
- Advances and limitations of semi-elastic pneumatic cuffs in blood flow restriction training: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Why blood flow restriction cuff features are an important methodological consideration- a short commentary on "cerebral cortex activation and functional connectivity during low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction: an fNIRS study".Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Unpacking the blood flow restriction device features literature: multi-chambered bladder design.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular, perceptual, and performance responses to single- vs. multi-chambered blood flow restriction cuffs.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare 3 separate blood flow restriction (BFR) systems in their capacity to reduce repetitions to failure, impact perceptual responses, and cause adverse events during a low-load free-flow exercise. Methods: The study included healthy subjects aged 18 years or older who presented to an ambulatory-care sports medicine clinic. On day 1, participants' demographic characteristics and anthropomorphic measurements were recorded. Each participant performed dumbbell biceps curl repetitions to failure using 20% of his or her 1-repetition maximum weight with each arm. Participants were exposed to 3 different tourniquet systems for familiarization. On day 2, each participant's arm was randomized to a cuff system, and the participant performed 2 sets of biceps curl repetitions to failure with the cuff inflated. Repetitions to failure, rating of perceived effort (RPE), rating of perceived discomfort, and pulse oxygenation levels were recorded after each set. On day 3, participants completed a survey of their perceived delayed-onset muscle soreness. Results: The final analysis was performed on 42 arms, with 14 limbs per system. The study population had a mean age of 28.7 ± 2.4 years and a mean body mass index of 24.9 ± 4.3. All 3 systems successfully reduced repetitions to failure compared with unrestricted low-load exercise from baseline to BFR set 1 and from baseline to BFR set 2. There were no significant between-group differences among BFR systems regarding the number of repetitions to failure performed at baseline versus BFR set 1 or BFR set 2. The Delfi Personalized Tourniquet System (PTS) cohort had the greatest reductions in repetitions to failure from BFR set 1 to BFR set 2 ( Conclusions: The Delfi PTS, SmartCuffs Pro, and BStrong BFR systems were each safe and were able to significantly reduce repetitions to failure compared with a low-load free-flow condition when used in a BFR exercise protocol. The Delfi PTS system may produce a higher RPE with prolonged use in comparison to the other systems. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective cohort study.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.