ArticleJournal of human kinetics2025
Acute Impact of Different Reperfusion Duration Following Blood Flow Restriction on Bar Velocity during the Bench Press Exercise.
Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of different reperfusion duration following intra-conditioning blood flow restriction (BFR) on bar velocity during the bench press exercise and muscle viscoelastic properties of the triceps brachii. Eleven resistance trained males (age: 24.3 ± 4.9 years; body mass: 85.5 ± 13.2 kg; bench press 1RM: 123.6 ± 25.4 kg; training experience: 6.8 ± 5.1 years) volunteered for the study. During the experimental sessions participants performed 5 sets of 3 repetitions of the bench press exercise with a load of 60% 1RM under four different conditions: two BFR (80% AOP) and two control conditions. For the BFR conditions, cuffs were applied before each set for 4.5 min and released 30 or 60 s before the start of the set as reperfusion. Under the control conditions, BFR was not applied and the total duration of rest intervals amounted to 5 min and 5.5 min. Measurements of viscoelastic properties were conducted at baseline and immediately after completion of each set of the bench press exercise. The two-way ANOVA showed no significant condition × set interaction for mean and peak bar velocity (p = 0.93; p = 0.787; accordingly), and no main effect of condition for mean and peak bar velocity (p = 0.57; p = 0.417; accordingly). The Friedman's test showed no differences in oscillation frequency (p = 0.156), stiffness (p = 0.368), and the logarithmic decrement of tissue oscillation (p = 0.644). The results of this study indicate that BFR during rest intervals does not acutely influence mean and peak bar velocity, as well as mechanical properties of the triceps brachii regardless of the duration of reperfusion.
Indexed as
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.