ArticleCureus2025
Acute Neuromuscular Responses to Combined Electrical Stimulation and Blood Flow Restriction: Effects on Quadriceps Torque, Fatigue, and Pain.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) offers a promising therapeutic strategy for enhancing muscle strength in clinical populations who are unable to engage in high-intensity voluntary exercise. However, the optimal combination of NMES intensity and BFR pressure remains unclear, especially in terms of achieving an effective therapeutic outcome while maintaining patient tolerability. In this study, we sought to investigate how varying NMES intensities (medium-to-high) combined with different BFR pressures may affect quadriceps muscle torque generation, fatigue development, and pain perception. Methods Sixteen healthy individuals (10 females and six males; mean age: 19.3 ± 2.9 years) underwent six randomized experimental conditions combining two NMES intensities (50% and 75% of maximum tolerable intensity) with three different BFR pressures: unrestricted flow (0 mmHg), moderate restriction (50 mmHg), and severe restriction (250 mmHg). Each condition consisted of one set of five isometric contractions. Outcome measures included evoked torque (assessed via isokinetic dynamometry), fatigue slope (calculated through linear regression analysis), and pain perception (evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results Evoked torque significantly decreased during the fourth and fifth repetitions under severe BFR conditions relative to initial repetitions (p = 0.016). The rate of fatigue development, as measured by slope analysis, was significantly accelerated in all BFR conditions compared to unrestricted circulation (p = 0.013). Pain scores were significantly higher under severe BFR pressure, with a dose-dependent relationship between NMES intensity and discomfort, where 75% of maximum tolerable intensity elicited significantly greater pain than 50% intensity (p = 0.001). Conclusions The combination of moderate-to-high NMES intensity with severe BFR pressure accelerates muscular fatigue while increasing pain perception. For clinical implementation, we recommend initiating protocols with 50% maximum tolerable NMES intensity combined with moderate BFR pressure (50 mmHg) to optimize therapeutic benefit while maintaining patient tolerability. Progression to higher intensities should be personalized based on the patient's response and level of adherence.
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.