期刊
JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE NEUROSCIENCE
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 -出版社
IMR PRESS
DOI: 10.31083/j.jin2102053
关键词
Intracortical inhibition; Intracortical facilitation; Strength training; Motor cortex; Tibialis anterior; Plasticity; Occlusion training; Transcranial magnetic stimulation
资金
- Health Research Fund of the Central Den-mark Region [614864]
This study aimed to investigate the neurophysiological changes and patient perceptions following blood flow restriction exercise (BFR-E) in patients with stroke. The results showed no significant differences in neurophysiological parameters, feasibility, tolerability, and perceptions of safety between BFR-E and exercise without blood flow restriction.
Background: Blood flow restriction exercise (BFR-E) could be a useful training adjunct for patients with weakness after stroke to augment the effects of exercise on muscle activity. We aimed to examine neurophysiological changes (primary aim) and assess patient perceptions (secondary aim) following BFR-E. Methods: Fourteen participants with stroke performed BFR-E (1 session) and exercise without blood flow restrictsion (Exercise only) (1 session), on two days, approximate to 7 days apart. In each session, two sets of tibialis anterior (TA) contractions were performed and electromyography (EMG) was recorded. Eight participants underwent transcranial magnetic stimulation (single-pulse stimulation, short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF)) and peripheral electrical stimulation (maximal peak-to-peak M-wave (M-max)) of the TA before, immediately-after, 10-min-after and 20-min-after BFR-E and Exercise only. Numerical rating scores (NRS) for pain, discomfort, fatigue, safety, focus and difficulty were collected for all subjects (n = 14). Paired comparisons and linear mixed models assessed the effects of BFR-E and Exercise only. Results: No adverse events due to exercise were reported. There was no contraction-number x condition interaction for EMG amplitude during exercise (p - 0.15), or time x condition interaction for single-pulse stmulation, SICI, ICF or M-max amplitude (p = 0.34 to p= 0.97). There was no difference between BFR-E and Exercise only in NRS scores (p= 0.10 to p= 0.50). Conclusion: Using our training paradigm, neurophysiological parameters, feasibility, tolerability and perceptions of safety were not different between BTR-E and Exercise only. As participants were generally well-functioning, our results are not generalizable to lower functioning people with stroke, different (more intense) exercise protocols or longer term training over weeks or months.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据