ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Does exercising bilaterally require measuring bilaterally? Bilateral versus unilateral tourniquet cuff inflation during measurement of arterial occlusion pressure: considerations for blood flow restriction exercise.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: It is recommended to use a tourniquet cuff pressure between 40-80% of the individuals' arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) during blood flow restriction (BFR) exercise. The AOP is usually determined in one limb for unilateral BFR exercise or in both limbs individually for bilateral BFR exercise. However, given that the tourniquet cuffs are inflated at both limbs simultaneously during bilateral BFR exercises (e.g., cycling, walking, and squat exercise), it is currently not known if the respective AOP also needs to be determined during bilateral tourniquet cuff inflation. Consequently, the present study aimed to compare the AOP during unilateral versus bilateral tourniquet cuff inflation in the lower extremities. Methods: In a randomized cross-over trial, the AOP of 25 young healthy participants was determined during unilateral and bilateral tourniquet cuff inflation in supine, seated, and standing position. All measurements were completed in one experimental session with a rest period of 5 min in between. At the beginning and end of each condition, heart rate and blood pressure were recorded. Results: Regardless of body position, AOP was higher during bilateral compared to unilateral tourniquet cuff inflation ( Discussion: Even though there was a statistically significant difference in AOP between unilateral and bilateral tourniquet cuff inflation irrespective of body position, bilateral cuff inflation during AOP determination appears to have only minor impact on AOP in the lower extremities given the small mean difference and trivial effect size. However, since differences in AOP between unilateral and bilateral tourniquet cuff inflation of ≥ 30 mmHg have been recorded, practitioners must be aware of potentially pronounced differences between unilateral and bilateral cuff inflation during AOP determination in some individuals using the specific BFR device and AOP measurement protocol employed in this study. These results need to be verified for different inflation protocols, devices (i.e., manual versus automatic AOP determination), and populations (e.g., older adults, patients).
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.