The purpose of this research was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to compare the effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) to the effects of non-training (CON) and traditional RT on strength in elderly people. This was a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), published in English, from inception to 2022, conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. The methodological quality was assessed using GRADE protocol. The risk of bias was assessed using RoB2 software. Standardized mean differences (SMD), mean difference, were pooled using a random-effects model. A p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Eight RCTs were included. We found no significant differences in the effects between BFR and RT (SMD = -0.18 [-0.56 to 0.19]; p = 0.34; I2 = 12%). Also, evidence from our research shows that the effect of BFR is better than non-training (CON) for strengthening in older adults (SMD = 0.63 [0.24 to 1.01]; p = 0.001; I2 = 11%). Our primary findings show that training with BFR may be an alternative methodology of training for the elderly and this training strategy may be interesting for health professionals working with elderly people with low tolerance to high intensity RT.
Blood flow restriction resistance training as an alternative to resistance training alone to improve strength in elderly: a systematic review with meta-analysis
A. Mallmann,Leonardo Peterson dos Santos,Lucas Denardi Dória,Luis Fernando Ferreira,T. R. Ramis,Luis Henrique Telles da Rosa
Published 2023 in medRxiv
ABSTRACT
PUBLICATION RECORD
- Publication year
2023
- Venue
medRxiv
- Publication date
2023-01-24
- Fields of study
Medicine
- Identifiers
- External record
- Source metadata
Semantic Scholar
CITATION MAP
EXTRACTION MAP
CLAIMS
- No claims are published for this paper.
CONCEPTS
- No concepts are published for this paper.
REFERENCES
Showing 1-38 of 38 references · Page 1 of 1