| Title |
Effects of detraining after blood flow-restricted low-load elastic band training on muscle size and arterial stiffness in older women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-015-1132-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tomohiro Yasuda, Kazuya Fukumura, Haruko Iida, Toshiaki Nakajima |
| Abstract |
We examined the effects of detraining after blood flow-restricted (BFR) low-load elastic band training on muscle size and arterial stiffness in older women. Fourteen women were divided into BFR training (BFR-T) or non-BFR training (CON-T). Each group participated in 12 weeks of arm curl and press down training using an elastic band either with (BFR-T) or without BFR (CON-T). Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) for upper arms and cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) were evaluated before and after the 12-week training period and also after 12 weeks of detraining. CSA and MVIC were higher at post and detraining (CSA: 16.3% (p < 0.01) and 6.9% (p < 0.01) for elbow flexion and 17.1% (p < 0.01) and 8.7% (p > 0.05) for elbow extension; MVIC: 7.3 and 3.9% (both p > 0.05) for elbow flexion and 17.6 and 15.1% (both p < 0.01) for elbow extension) than at pre for the BFR-T, but not for the CON-T. There was no change in CAVI for the two groups. Increased muscle strength/size following 12 weeks of elastic band BFR-T was well maintained with a low risk of arterial stiffness after 12 weeks of detraining in older women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 130 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 30 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 40 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 41 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,441,465
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,467
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,951
of 263,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#88
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.