Author(s): SMITH, H., BIRD, S.P., KAVANAGH, T., OLSEN, P., HAMLIN, M.J., Institution: LINCOLN UNIVERSITY, Country: NEW ZEALAND, Abstract-ID: 358

INTRODUCTION:
Blood flow restriction (BFR) training, shown to enhance muscular strength and hypertrophy, has been studied for its potential in aiding various groups, including older people and recovering athletes. It’s effectiveness, however, in maintaining or enhancing performance among highly trained athletes during a taper phase at a season’s end remains undecided. This study aimed to explore if BFR could help maintain athletic performance in a taper phase where the aim was to reduce the external load, but maintain intensity, in basketball players.
METHODS:
The study involved 17 experienced basketball players divided into two groups: a placebo group (n = 8, 22 ± 2.1 years mean ± SD) and a BFR group (n = 9, 21.1 ± 1.5 years). Typically, their training schedule included strength training 3 days/week, alongside 2 team training sessions, 2 individual skill sessions, and 1 competitive basketball game per week. For the studys taper period, players adhered to this weekly routine but reduced the volume of lifting while either maintaining (placebo) or reducing (BFR) lifting intensity. For 4 weeks during the taper the BFR group exercised with 60% arterial occlusion pressure at an intensity of 25-30% of their one-repetition max (1RM), while the placebo group completed their normal taper training at an intensity of 80% of their 1RM wearing BFR cuffs which were only inflated to 20% arterial occlusion pressure. Additional metrics, such as arterial oxygen saturation, heart rate, rate of perceived exertion, and average bar velocity, were also monitored during the training sessions.
RESULTS:
Compared to the placebo group, the BFR group increased sprint performance over 5m (-1.4 ± 1.5% mean ± 95% CI, p = 0.032), 10m (-1.1 ± 0.5%, p = 0.0003), and 20m (-0.3 ± 0.5%, p = 0.223). Compared to the placebo group improvements were also observed in the BFR group in their barbell back squat (9.6 ± 8.0%, p = 0.013), trap bar deadlift (1.3 ± 5.5%, p = 0.427), barbell bench press (4.5 ± 4.8%, p = 0.106) and barbell prone row (3.3 ± 5.1%, p = 0.199). Countermovement jump performance also improved in the BFR compared to placebo participants (1.1 ± 0.8%, p = 0.035).
CONCLUSION:
Implementing BFR to maintain exercise intensity while reducing overall work volume has shown to not only be effective in sustaining performance levels during a taper phase, but this type of training can actually increase performance in many cases. This information can be used to develop targeted interventions throughout a macrocycle in different phases of the season and may be useful in team sports where players must peak a number of times throughout the season.