↓ Skip to main content

Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction: An Updated Evidence-Based Approach for Enhanced Muscular Development

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
47 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
242 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
883 Mendeley
Title
Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction: An Updated Evidence-Based Approach for Enhanced Muscular Development
Published in
Sports Medicine, November 2014
DOI 10.1007/s40279-014-0288-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brendan R. Scott, Jeremy P. Loenneke, Katie M. Slattery, Ben J. Dascombe

Abstract

A growing body of evidence supports the use of moderate blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with low-load resistance exercise to enhance hypertrophic and strength responses in skeletal muscle. Research also suggests that BFR during low-workload aerobic exercise can result in small but significant morphological and strength gains, and BFR alone may attenuate atrophy during periods of unloading. While BFR appears to be beneficial for both clinical and athletic cohorts, there is currently no common consensus amongst scientists and practitioners regarding the best practice for implementing BFR methods. If BFR is not employed appropriately, there is a risk of injury to the participant. It is also important to understand how variations in the cuff application can affect the physiological responses and subsequent adaptation to BFR training. The optimal way to manipulate acute exercise variables, such as exercise type, load, volume, inter-set rest periods and training frequency, must also be considered prior to designing a BFR training programme. The purpose of this review is to provide an evidence-based approach to implementing BFR exercise. These guidelines could be useful for practitioners using BFR training in either clinical or athletic settings, or for researchers in the design of future studies investigating BFR exercise.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 883 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 871 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 170 19%
Student > Master 151 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 74 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 63 7%
Researcher 45 5%
Other 126 14%
Unknown 254 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 259 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 132 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 115 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 2%
Other 50 6%
Unknown 279 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. 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 12 March 2024.
All research outputs
#520,743
of 26,114,666 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#490
of 2,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,999
of 373,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#7
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,114,666 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,921 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 373,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.