•  
  •  
 

Document Type

Abstract

Publication Date

1-14-2026

Abstract

Implementing blood flow restriction (BFR) during exercise is becoming an increasingly useful adjunct in exercise and rehabilitation settings. Studies have shown that the advantages of combining BFR with training can be observed in two scenarios: (1) lower absolute intensity training (such as walking) induces adaptations similar to high-intensity training (such as interval running); (2) higher physiological stimuli can be achieved during moderate-to-high-intensity exercise, leading to greater improvements in aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular parameters. The former has been well documented in previous studies, but there is a lack of consensus regarding the combination of BFR (during or after exercise) with interval training (IT) protocols. Therefore, this study evaluates the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular strength. Method: The search was conducted in August 2024 across six databases. Studies with randomized controlled designs that investigated maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), peak power output (PPO), mean power output (MPO), and muscular strength parameters were selected. Data (mean ± standard deviation and sample size) were extracted from the included studies and converted into the standardized mean difference (SMD). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses were used to examine potential sources of heterogeneity due to intensity, training status, cuff pressure, and cuff application phase. Seventeen publications (15 studies) consisting of 387 participants were included. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on VO2max (SMDpooled=0.46, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.76, p=0.003, I²=33.7%, p=0.105) was moderatesignificantwith [sic] low heterogeneity. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on peak power output (SMDpooled=-0.08, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.40, p=0.739, I²=20.7%, p=0.283) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on mean power output (SMDpooled=0.26, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.71, p=0.255, I²=0.0%, p=0.759) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on muscular strength (SMDpooled=0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.88, p < 0.001, I²=42.5%, p=0.042) was moderately significant with moderate heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, and muscular strength were significantly influenced by intensity (high intensity vs. moderate to low intensity) and training status (trained vs. untrained). To systematically assess the evidence regarding the effects of BFR + IT on enhancing aerobic capacity and muscular strength, but not on improving anaerobic capacity. Implementing blood flow restriction (BFR) during exercise is becoming an increasingly useful adjunct in exercise and rehabilitation settings. Studies have shown that the advantages of combining BFR with training can be observed in two scenarios: (1) lower absolute intensity training (such as walking) induces adaptations similar to high-intensity training (such as interval running); (2) higher physiological stimuli can be achieved during moderate-to-high-intensity exercise, leading to greater improvements in aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular parameters. The former has been well documented in previous studies, but there is a lack of consensus regarding the combination of BFR (during or after exercise) with interval training (IT) protocols. Therefore, this study evaluates the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular strength. Method: The search was conducted in August 2024 across six databases. Studies with randomized controlled designs that investigated maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), peak power output (PPO), mean power output (MPO), and muscular strength parameters were selected. Data (mean ± standard deviation and sample size) were extracted from the included studies and converted into the standardized mean difference (SMD). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses were used to examine potential sources of heterogeneity due to intensity, training status, cuff pressure, and cuff application phase. Seventeen publications (15 studies) consisting of 387 participants were included. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on VO2max (SMDpooled=0.46, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.76, p=0.003, I²=33.7%, p=0.105) was moderatesignificantwith [sic] low heterogeneity. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on peak power output (SMDpooled=-0.08, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.40, p=0.739, I²=20.7%, p=0.283) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on mean power output (SMDpooled=0.26, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.71, p=0.255, I²=0.0%, p=0.759) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on muscular strength (SMDpooled=0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.88, p < 0.001, I²=42.5%, p=0.042) was moderately significant with moderate heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, and muscular strength were significantly influenced by intensity (high intensity vs. moderate to low intensity) and training status (trained vs. untrained). To systematically assess the evidence regarding the effects of BFR + IT on enhancing aerobic capacity and muscular strength, but not on improving anaerobic capacity. Implementing blood flow restriction (BFR) during exercise is becoming an increasingly useful adjunct in exercise and rehabilitation settings. Studies have shown that the advantages of combining BFR with training can be observed in two scenarios: (1) lower absolute intensity training (such as walking) induces adaptations similar to high-intensity training (such as interval running); (2) higher physiological stimuli can be achieved during moderate-to-high-intensity exercise, leading to greater improvements in aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular parameters. The former has been well documented in previous studies, but there is a lack of consensus regarding the combination of BFR (during or after exercise) with interval training (IT) protocols. Therefore, this study evaluates the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular strength. Method: The search was conducted in August 2024 across six databases. Studies with randomized controlled designs that investigated maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), peak power output (PPO), mean power output (MPO), and muscular strength parameters were selected. Data (mean ± standard deviation and sample size) were extracted from the included studies and converted into the standardized mean difference (SMD). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses were used to examine potential sources of heterogeneity due to intensity, training status, cuff pressure, and cuff application phase. Seventeen publications (15 studies) consisting of 387 participants were included. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on VO2max (SMDpooled=0.46, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.76, p=0.003, I²=33.7%, p=0.105) was moderatesignificantwith [sic] low heterogeneity. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on peak power output (SMDpooled=-0.08, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.40, p=0.739, I²=20.7%, p=0.283) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on mean power output (SMDpooled=0.26, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.71, p=0.255, I²=0.0%, p=0.759) was small and not significant. The pooled effect size of BFR + IT on muscular strength (SMDpooled=0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.88, p < 0.001, I²=42.5%, p=0.042) was moderately significant with moderate heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of BFR + IT on aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, and muscular strength were significantly influenced by intensity (high intensity vs. moderate to low intensity) and training status (trained vs. untrained). To systematically assess the evidence regarding the effects of BFR + IT on enhancing aerobic capacity and muscular strength, but not on improving anaerobic capacity.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18122/ijpah.5.1.10.boisestate

Download

Share

COinS