ArticleBiology of sport2026
Ischemic preconditioning combined with inter-set palm cooling enhances performance in strength-trained men during high-intensity resistance training: A randomized crossover trial.
Article in Biology of sport, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on performance during highintensity resistance exercise (RE) sessions, as well as the additional effects of inter-set palm cooling (PC) and the potential underlying mechanisms. Twelve resistance-trained men participated in three RE sessions in a randomized order: (1) IPC followed by RE with inter-set PC (15°C for 2.5 minutes), (2) IPC followed by RE, (3) SHAM followed by RE. IPC involved four cycles of 5-minute ischemia/5-minute reperfusion at 220 mmHg on the upper arm, whereas SHAM involved 20 mmHg with a pneumatic cuff. The RE protocol included three sets to exhaustion, consisting of six exercises at 85% of one-repetition maximum. Multiple perceptual parameters were assessed during RE, and blood samples were obtained both before and after four cycles of ischemia/reperfusion as well as after RE. The results indicated that compared with SHAM, IPC significantly increased the total work volume (∆ = 2.6%); the total number of repetitions (∆ = 4.3%); the number of repetitions in specific exercises; and the levels of several arousal indicators, such as norepinephrine levels before RE and arousal level (assessed using the Felt Arousal Scale) during RE (p < 0.05). The IPC + PC combination further outperformed SHAM alone in most parameters (p < 0.05). However, fatigue indicators (rating of perceived exertion and lactate level) did not differ significantly across the protocols. In conclusion, this study suggest that IPC enhances high-intensity RE performance, potentially through increased arousal levels, with PC augmenting exercise performance by amplifying the arousal response.
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.