Page 65 - Journal of Special Operations Medicine - Spring 2015

Several of the individual gains were modest; however, it therapy. In addition, follow­on evaluations are necessary
is important to recognize that these patients still had ob­ to determine if the successful results obtained in this se­
jective improvements with BFR training despite chronic ries persist in the long term. If this training method ben­
muscle weakness that was resistant to prior standard re­ efits chronic muscle weakness patients, it offers a new
habilitation techniques. These strength gains are impor­ therapy to improve the functionality, and thus the inde­
tant to improve patient functional outcomes. pendence and lives of our wounded Servicemembers and
others with chronic muscle weakness.
This series demonstrated that BFR training is not only
effective but also a safe method of improving strength in
healthy, active individuals, which has been demonstrated Conclusion
in prior studies. 2,16,17,19,31–33 No patients in this series expe­ This case series demonstrated that BFR training at low
rienced any complications associated with the BFR train­ loads is an effective tool when used as part of a reha­
ing, and all patients were able to complete the 2 weeks bilitation program in individuals with chronic thigh
of training. The patients in this case series achieved weakness.
strength gains while training with weight that is at 20%
of their 1RM. This is a much lighter load than what is
recommended by the ACSM weight­training guidelines Disclaimers
for standard resistance training. The lower load training The view(s) expressed herein are those of the author(s)
may be beneficial for patients who are unable to toler­ and do not reflect the official policy or position of
ate heavier loads due to various reasons such as restric­ Brooke Army Medical Center, the US Army Medical De­
tions in the early postoperative period. Contrary to BFR partment, the US Army Office of the Surgeon General,
training, traditional strength­training required loads up the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or
to 80% of the 1RM to affect muscle strength. 10
the US government.
Clinically, the applications for BFR training have con­
tinued to expand. The majority of studies evaluating Disclosures
BFR training have been performed on normal, healthy, The authors have indicated they have no financial rela­
active human subjects showing strength improvements tionships relevant to this article to disclose.
in individuals both new to a strengthening program and
5
when expanding on a previous intense resistance exer­
cise regimen. One example of the latter is a study by References
Yamanaka et al. demonstrating an increase in strength
after 4 weeks of BFR training in college football players, 1. Abe T, et al. Muscle, tendon, and somatotropin responses to
including those who had already completed their regu­ the restriction of muscle blood flow induced by KAATSU­
walk training. Equine Vet J Suppl. 2006;345–348.
lar training routine. 19 2. Iida H, et al. Hemodynamic and neurohumoral responses to
the restriction of femoral blood flow by KAATSU in healthy
Other studies have evaluated the implications of BFR subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007;100:275–285.
training for elderly adults with sarcopenia, the loss of 3. Iida H, et al. Effects of walking with blood flow restriction
muscle mass with age. This population often does not on limb venous compliance in elderly subjects. Clin Physiol
8,9
Funct Imaging. 2011;31:472–476.
have the capacity to perform high­resistance exercises 4. Kon M, et al. Effects of acute hypoxia on metabolic and hor­
that would normally be required for significant strength monal responses to resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
gains. BFR training in these patients has improved mus­ 2010;42:1279–1285.
cle strength and maintained muscle mass. It demon­ 5. Kon M, et al. Effects of low–intensity resistance exercise un­
8,9
strated success when used for rehabilitation of patients der acute systemic hypoxia on hormonal responses. J Strength
Cond Res. 2012;26:611–617.
with with inflammatory myopathies as well. 34,35 6. Saito MS, et al. Resistance exercise training enhances sympa­
thetic nerve activity during fatigue­inducing isometric hand­
Our case series is the first known example to imple­ grip trials. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2009;105:225–234.
ment BFR training into a physical therapy program for 7. Schoenfeld BJ. Is there a minimum intensity threshold for
chronic muscle weakness in patients with musuloskel­ resistance training­induced hypertrophic adaptations? Sports
Med. 2013. 43:1279–1288.
etal trauma. The series of cases presented are evidence 8. Abe T, et al. Effects of low­intensity walk training with re­
that strength gains can be achieved in a relatively short stricted leg blood flow on muscle strength and aerobic capac­
amount of time (2 weeks) using this low resistence ther­ ity in older adults. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2010; 33:34–40.
apy modality in these patients. 9. Loenneke JP, Pujol TJ. Sarcopenia: an emphasis on occlusion
training and dietary protein. Hippokratia. 2011;15:132–7.
10. Esco MR. Resistance training for health and fitness. Ameri­
Future research is needed to determine if the improve­ can College of Sports Medicine Consumer Information Com­
ments seen with BFR training are superior to standard mittee. 2013; www.acsm.org.

Blood Flow Restriction Rehabilitation for Extremity Weakness 55