ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Blood flow restriction with different loads versus moderate intensity resistive exercises in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a single-blind randomized controlled trial.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06637124 (Blood Flow Restriction With Different Loads Versus Moderate Resistive Exercises in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis), 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.
Blood Flow Restriction With Different Loads Versus Moderate Resistive Exercises in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common condition causing pain, muscle weakness, and functional impairment. In addition, many patients cannot tolerate resistance training due to pain. Blood flow restriction (BFR) has been proposed as a low-load alternative strategy to improve muscle function, but the effectiveness of passive BFR application remains unclear in KOA. Therefore, this study compared passive BFR at 50% and 70% limb occlusion pressure (LOP) with moderate-intensity resistance training (MI-RT) in KOA.
methodsA three-arm, parallel groups, single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted on 75 Patients, aged 45-60 years, diagnosed with KOA. They were randomly assigned to receive 16 sessions (twice weekly for eight weeks) for either the study groups (BFR-50% LOP; BFR-70% LOP) or the control group (MI-RT). The primary outcomes were quadriceps torque and normalized torque. Pain intensity, functional mobility, functional ability, KOA impact, Rate of Perceived Exertion, and global perceived improvement were secondary outcomes. Measures were recorded at baseline, 4, and 8 weeks.
resultsAll interventions produced significant improvements over time across all outcomes (p < 0.001). Compared with both BFR groups, MI-RT produced greater increases in quadriceps torque than BFR-50% LOP (MD = 18.57 N.m, p < 0.001) and BFR-70% LOP (MD = 13.81 N.m, p = 0.004) at week 8, with significant increases in perceived exertion, whereas no changes in exertion were observed in either BFR group. The BFR-70% LOP group demonstrated greater improvement in lower-extremity functional ability than MI-RT (MD = 6.8 points, p = 0.02) and BFR-50% LOP (MD = 15.9 points, p < 0.001). However, no significant between-group differences were observed for pain intensity, KOA impact, functional mobility, or perceived improvement.
conclusionMI-RT was the most effective intervention for improving quadriceps strength, whereas passive BFR at 70% LOP yielded the greatest improvements in lower-extremity functional ability while requiring less perceived exertion. These findings suggest that passive BFR at 70% LOP may be a feasible rehabilitation option for patients with knee osteoarthritis who cannot tolerate resistive exercise. Passive BFR at 50% LOP produced smaller functional improvements than the other interventions.
trial registrationThe study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No: NCT06637124) on September 24, 2024. URL: https://share.google/fuSDVPVt2pxG7M1HU .
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.