ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2025
Qualitative Evaluation of Patient Experiences with Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction and Heavy-Load Resistance Training Post-ACL Reconstruction.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07384780 (Isokinetic Exercise Combined With Blood Flow Restriction), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Isokinetic Exercise Combined With Blood Flow Restriction: High-Load Vs Low-Load Training : A Randomized Controlled Trial in Post-ACL Reconstruction Populations
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Low-load blood flow restriction training (LL-BFRT) has been suggested as an alternative to heavy-load resistance training (HLRT) following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. While current research primarily focuses on the clinical outcomes of LL-BFRT and HLRT, patients' experiences with these rehabilitation methods remain unexplored. Such an exploration may provide insights that can contribute to more patient-centered rehabilitation approaches. Purpose: This study aims to explore patients' experiences with strength rehabilitation using LL-BFRT or HLRT following ACL reconstruction. Study design: Qualitative Cohort study. Methods: Patients who had undergone primary bone-patellar tendon-bone ACL reconstruction and completed an LL-BFRT or HLRT protocol within the prior six months were contacted to participate in semi-structured interviews. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to identify key themes and patterns. Results: Ten participants were interviewed, with five in the LL-BFRT group and five in the HLRT group. The interviews were conducted, on average, four months after completion of the strength rehabilitation protocol. The inductive thematic analysis revealed four main themes: experiences with strength training, perceived benefits, challenges encountered, and impact on the recovery process. All participants experienced progression in muscle strength. Three participants in the LL-BFRT group reported thigh muscle pain, whereas four participants in the HLRT group noted knee pain during strength rehabilitation. Overall, participants had positive views on their recovery process, except for two participants in the HLRT group who reported negative effects on their recovery due to persistent knee pain. Conclusion: The results of this study highlights patients' experiences with LL-BFRT and HLRT following ACL reconstruction. The findings indicate that LL-BFRT may be suitable in the early rehabilitation phase, as knee pain in the HLRT group may negatively affect the recovery process. Level of evidence: NA.
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.