Semester of Graduation
Fall 2025
Degree Type
Dissertation/Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Science in Exercise Science
Department
Exercise Science and Sport Management
Committee Chair/First Advisor
Daphney Carter
Second Advisor
Mitchell Zaplatosch
Third Advisor
Garrett Hester
Abstract
Background: Blood flow restriction (BFR) enhances aerobic capacity and muscle mass when used with aerobic exercise (AE). However, there is little research on BFR with continuous AE and effects on cardiovascular and metabolic responses. This study aimed to determine the effects of BFR with AE on cardiovascular and metabolic responses. Methods: Visit 1 included a maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) test and familiarization followed. Visit 2 included AE with bilateral BFR (AEBFR) at 50% VO2max and 60% arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) for 15 min. Visit 3 included AE until the approximate calories from visit 2 were reached. During exercise, discomfort and pain were recorded every 3 min, VO2 and heart rate (HR) were monitored continuously, and changes in blood pressure (BP), HR, and weight were recorded approximately 10 min post-exercise. Bayesian Paired Sample T-tests were used to analyze results, with a BF10 ≥ 3 indicating more than moderate evidence for a difference between conditions. Results are presented as mean±SD. Results: 24 participants (13 females, age 22±3 yr, VO2max 43.6±9.7 kg/ml/min) completed this study. HR (bpm) was higher in AEBFR (140.24±14.81) than AE (122.26±12.29, BF10=1.153e8). Discomfort (A.U.) was higher in AEBFR (3.9±1.3) than AE (0.9±0.9, BF10=1.64e8). Pain (A.U.) was higher in AEBFR (2.7±1.7) than AE (0.5±0.9, BF10=17084.3). ΔSystolic BP (mm Hg, AEBFR (14.6±6.7), AE (11.9±5.7, BF10=2.77)) and ΔDiastolic BP (mm Hg, AEBFR (8.2±7.0), AE (6.4±7.1, BF10=0.34)) were anecdotal. Conclusion: AEBFR has a greater effect than AE during exercise, suggesting that those with cardiovascular concerns may consider avoiding an exaggerated response from BFR.