Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul 17;24(1):580.
doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06693-3.

ADAPTations to low load blood flow restriction exercise versus conventional heavier load resistance exercise in UK military personnel with persistent knee pain: protocol for the ADAPT study, a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

Affiliations

ADAPTations to low load blood flow restriction exercise versus conventional heavier load resistance exercise in UK military personnel with persistent knee pain: protocol for the ADAPT study, a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

Robyn P Cassidy et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. .

Abstract

Background: Muscle atrophy, muscle weakness and localised pain are commonly reported following musculoskeletal injury (MSKI). To mitigate this risk and prepare individuals to return to sport or physically demanding occupations, resistance training (RT) is considered a vital component of rehabilitation. However, to elicit adaptations in muscle strength, exercise guidelines recommend lifting loads ≥ 70% of an individual's one repetition maximum (1-RM). Unfortunately, individuals with persistent knee pain are often unable to tolerate such high loads and this may negatively impact the duration and extent of their recovery. Low load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) is an alternative RT technique that has demonstrated improvements in muscle strength, hypertrophy, and pain in the absence of high mechanical loading. However, the effectiveness of high-frequency LL-BFR in a residential rehabilitation environment remains unclear. This study will compare the efficacy of high frequency LL-BFR to 'conventional' heavier load resistance training (HL-RT) on measures of physical function and pain in adults with persistent knee pain.

Methods: This is a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 150 UK service personnel (aged 18-55) admitted for a 3-week residential rehabilitation course with persistent knee pain. Participants will be randomised to receive: a) LL-BFR delivered twice daily at 20% 1-RM or b) HL-RT three-times per week at 70% 1-RM. Outcomes will be recorded at baseline (T1), course discharge (T2) and at three-months following course (T3). The primary outcome will be the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) at T2. Secondary outcomes will include patient reported perceptions of pain, physical and occupational function and objective measures of muscle strength and neuromuscular performance. Additional biomechanical and physiological mechanisms underpinning both RT interventions will also be investigated as part of a nested mechanistic study.

Discussion: LL-BFR is a rehabilitation modality that has the potential to induce positive clinical adaptations in the absence of high mechanical loads and therefore could be considered a treatment option for patients suffering significant functional deficits who are unable to tolerate heavy load RT. Consequently, results from this study will have a direct clinical application to healthcare service providers and patients involved in the rehabilitation of physically active adults suffering MSKI.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.org reference number, NCT05719922.

Keywords: Defence rehabilitation; Knee injury; Lower limb; Musculoskeletal health; Occlusion training; Occupational rehabilitation; Return-to-duty; Strength training; Training load.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Testing positions and order for isometric strength assessment. A Hip flexors B Hip extensors C Hip adductors D Hip abductors E Knee extensors F Knee flexors
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Decline knee bend task. A Start position; B End position

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hunter GR, McCarthy JP, Bamman MM. Effects of resistance training on older adults. Sports Med. 2004;34(5):329–348. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200434050-00005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lorenz DS, Reiman MP, Walker JC. Periodization: current review and suggested implementation for athletic rehabilitation. Sports Health. 2010;2(6):509–518. doi: 10.1177/1941738110375910. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Slysz J, Stultz J, Burr JF. The efficacy of blood flow restricted exercise: a systematic review & meta-analysis. J Sci Med Sport. 2016;19(8):669–675. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2015.09.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee IM, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(7):1334–59. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jones JC, Burks R, Owens BD, Sturdivant RX, Svoboda SJ, Cameron KL. Incidence and risk factors associated with meniscal injuries among active-duty US military service members. J Athl Train. 2012;47(1):67–73. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-47.1.67. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data