Abstract:Background Increasing muscle strength may allow an athlete to improve their performance while reducing the risk of injury. Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) has emerged as an alternative for increasing muscle strengh because it can promote physiological changes and hypertrophy with a lower degree of mechanical overload. When combined with Neuromuscular Electrostimulation (NME) it offers the possibility of hypertrophy with greater activation of motor units, potentially increasing the effects of BFR. Objectives To evaluate the effects of strength training with BFR combined with NME of the quadriceps muscle in physically active individuals on parameters of strength and muscle activation. Methods This protocol is a randomized clinical trial with a blinded evaluator for groups and statistical analysis. Eligibility criteria will be age between 18 and 35 years old; both sexes and physically active according to the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. The following criteria are not considered appropriate: Body Mass Index over 30; use of stimulants in the 24 hours before the examinations; risk factors for thromboembolism and hypertension. Anthropometric data will be collected, followed by blood pressure measurement and kirtometers. Subjects will be randomly divided into three groups: Blood Flow Restriction Group (BFRG), Blood Flow Restriction and Electrostimulation Group (BFREG) and Conventional Exercise Group (CEG). A Vascular Doppler will be used to measure Total Occlusion Pressure (TOP). Maximum Repetition Test (1RM) unilateral will be used to determine the load during exercise, with adjustment in four weeks. An isokinetic dynamometer in concentric/eccentric mode at two angular speeds will be uses to assess muscle strenght: 60º/s and 180º/s, and isometric strength by the 30s test at 30º and 60º. Surface Electromyography (EMG) will be used to record the electrical activity of the quadriceps muscles. The intervention protocol consists of four sets of 30, 15, 15, 15 repetitions in the chair for extension, with one minute rest between sets, a load of 30% 1RM and 50% of POT, with adjustment of 5% each week up 80% of POT. The BFREG follows the same methodology, with an asymmetric biphasic current, frequency of 50Hz and a pulse duration of 400us. In the CEG the exercise will be performed without intervention in three sets of ten repetitions at 70% of 1RM. The training lasts eight weeks and takes place twice a week, with re-evaluation at the end of the training. The distribution of normality will be analysed by the Shapiro-Wilk test. To analyse the effect of group and the interventions, ANOVA for repeated measures and Bonferroni post test will be performed. The significant level adopted will be 5%. Conclusion It is reasonable to assume that BFR and the intervention associated with electrostimulation are superior to conventional training in terms of strength and muscle recruitment parameters. Implications Because BFR requires a reduced load and it has been hypothesised that its effects are similar to those of conventional training, BRF offers mechanical and physiological benefits. Reduced loading may produce the same results in terms of hypertrophy and increased muscle strength in individuals without joint overload and prolonged loading.

Acute Effects of the New Method Sarcoplasma Stimulating Training Versus Traditional Resistance Training on Total Training Volume, Lactate and Muscle Thickness

Comparison of different periodization models on isotonic and isokinetic muscle strength and lean mass in tactical athletes

Effects of Different Resistance Training Frequencies on Body Composition, Muscular Strength, Muscle Quality, and Metabolic Biomarkers in Sarcopenic Older Women

Physiological responses of three strength training methods in trained individuals

A Comparison of the Effects of 6 Weeks of Traditional Resistance Training, Plyometric Training, and Complex Training on Measures of Strength and Anthropometrics

The Effect of Time-Equated Concurrent Training Programs in Resistance-Trained Men

Concurrent Training Followed by Detraining: Does the Resistance Training Intensity Matter?

Frequent Manipulation of Resistance Training Variables Promotes Myofibrillar Spacing Changes in Resistance-Trained Individuals

Acute Physiological Responses to an Intensity-And Time-Under-Tension-Equated Single- vs. Multiple-Set Resistance Training Bout in Trained Men

Comparison Between Traditional and Alternated Resistance Exercises on Blood Pressure, Acute Neuromuscular Responses, and Rating of Perceived Exertion in Recreationally Resistance-Trained Men

Effects of Different Weekly Set Volumes on Strength and Perceptual Responses in Athletes

Resistance training variable manipulations are less relevant than intrinsic biology in affecting muscle fiber hypertrophy

Training Volume Increases Or Maintenance Based On Previous Volume: The Effects On Muscular Adaptations In Trained Males

EFFECTS OF STRENGTH TRAINING WITH BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION AND ELECTROSTIMULATION ON MUSCLE STRENGTH AND ACTIVITY – STUDY PROTOCOL

Monitoring strength training: neuromuscular and hormonal profile

Interset Stretching vs. Traditional Strength Training: Effects on Muscle Strength and Size in Untrained Individuals

Aerobic Training With Blood Flow Restriction on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Effects of Training Volume in the Bench-Press Exercise Performed With Interrepetition Rest Periods on Strength Gains and Neuromuscular Adaptations

Individual muscle hypertrophy in high-load resistance training with and without blood flow restriction: A near-infrared spectroscopy approach

Effects of Resistance Training Overload Progression Protocols on Strength and Muscle Mass

Effect of Different Reduced Training Frequencies after 12 Weeks of Concurrent Resistance and Aerobic Training on Muscle Strength and Morphology