Author(s): GAVANDA, S., LÖHMER, R., LUBIAK, S.M., ISENMANN, I., GEISLER, S., HELD, S., Institution: IST HOCHSCHULE, Country: GERMANY, Abstract-ID: 278

INTRODUCTION:
Low-load resistance training (RT) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been shown to promote increases in muscle mass and strength that are typically associated with higher training intensities. However, evidence in female populations remain limited. This study investigated the effects of a 10-week upper-body RT program incorporating low-load practical BFR using non-pneumatic cuffs (pBFR; 20-30% 1RM) compared with a conventional moderate-load RT program performed without BFR (noBFR; 60-70% 1RM).
METHODS:
Thirty-six healthy, trained women were randomly assigned to either a pBFR group (n = 18; age = 30.3 ± 9.6 years) or a noBFR group (n = 18; age = 31.1 ± 8.3 years). Participants trained three times per week (two upper-body and one lower-body session). Lower-body RT was identical between groups and was not part of the primary research question. Upper-body RT consisted of the bench press, seated row, lat pulldown, shoulder press, all performed at 60–70% of 1RM in both groups. In addition, triceps pushdowns and preacher curls were performed at 20–30% of 1RM using non-pneumatic cuffs in the pBFR group, whereas the noBFR group performed these same exercises without BFR at 60–70% of 1RM. Changes in body composition, arm circumference, muscle thickness, and maximal strength were analyzed using separate two-way mixed factorial ANOVAs with Condition (pBFR vs. noBFR) and Time (Pretest vs. Posttest) as factors.
RESULTS:
Significant Condition × Time interactions were observed for biceps brachii muscle thickness (p = 0.009; η_p^2 = 0.186) and biceps flexion maximal strength (p = 0.009; η_p^2 = 0.183). Follow-up analyses revealed no between-group differences at each level of Time (p = 0.206–0.705, g = 0.080–0.280 and p=0.544–0.930, g=0.020–0.160, respectively), while both groups demonstrated similar improvements across Time (p < 0.001, g = 1.47–1.96 and p < 0.001, g = 1.42–2.02, respectively). Main effects of time were also observed for muscle mass (p = 0.034, g = 0.37), arm circumferences (p < 0.001, g = 1.49–1.92), triceps brachii muscle thickness (p < 0.001, g =0.81), and maximal strength in the bench press (p < 0.001, g = 1.25), seated row (p < 0.001, g = 1.71), and triceps extension (p < 0.001; g = 1.46).
CONCLUSION:
In summary, performing low-load pBFR on two upper-body exercises in addition to a standard moderate-load RT program produced gains in muscle size and strength comparable to a conventional moderate-load RT program, in which all exercises were performed at moderate load. Importantly, pBFR was implemented using non-pneumatic cuffs, reflecting real-world training environments where individualized occlusion pressures are limited. These findings suggest that pBFR may effectively compensate for reductions in exercise intensity and represent a viable alternative for women seeking strength and hypertrophy adaptations when higher loads are impractical or undesirable.