Efeito agudo do exercício resistido com restrição ao fluxo sanguíneo sobre variáveis metabólicas, hemodinâmicas, perceptivas e eletromiográficas em adultos

Abstract

The aim of the this study was to analyze the metabolical, hemodinamic, perceptive and electromyography responses of low intensity (LI) exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) and LI (30% 1RM) in the exercise free half squat (HS) in the pre and post moments and compare them between bodybuilders and practitioners Crossfit®. For this purpose the production of blood lactate, blood pressure (BP) heart rate (HR) and perceived exertion / pain (RPE / SPP) in the pre- and post-exercise periods, and electromyography signal (EMG) of the Vastus Lateralis (VL), Biceps Femoris (BF), Rectus Femoris (RF) and Vastus Medialis (VM) muscles during the strength exercise were measured. Nineteen male individuals took part in this study, being 10 of them bodybuilders practitioners (age = 25,40 ± 1,64 years; body fat percentage = 8,36 ± 2,20%; body mass index = 78,88 ± 6,81 Kg; height = 176,00 ± 5,31cm; weekly training frequency = 4,50 ± 0,85 days; time of training = 4,90 ± 1,28 years) and 9 CrossFit® practitioners (age = 27,44 ± 3,94 years; body fat percentage = 7,87 ± 3,71%; body mass index = 83,37 ± 7,78; height = 177,00 ± 7,00cm; weekly training frequency = 4,67 ± 0,50 days; time of training = 2,22 ± 0,44 years). On the first day, the individuals were taken anthropometric measurements and one-repetition maximum strength test (1RM) in the exercise Half Squat (HS) (1RM = bodybuilders = 112,40 ± 17,35 kg; CrossFit® = 137,11 ± 26,89 kg).On the following days, two random session of the aforementioned exercise were applied with occlusion pressure (60% total pressure) and the cuffs attached to the proximal parts of the lower limbs: a) 30%1RM + BFR (4 series sets 30, 15, 15, 15 repetitions) b) 30%1RM (4 series sets 30, 15, 15, 15 repetitions), where blood lactate was collected during rest and 2 minutes after training, AP BP and HRrest during rest, 5th and 10th minutes and electromyographic signal during the series sets of both protocols. Statistical tests were conducted for homogeneity of variance, besides Student’s t-tests for independent samples, repeated measures to group vs. time interaction evaluation followed by Bonferroni post-hoc test, adopting the significance p-value p ≤ 0,05.In both groups, there was a significant increase in protocol (BI 30% 1RM + RFS / BI 30% 1RM) and (interaction effect, p = 0.003) in protocol (BI 30% 1RM + RFS). EF (BI 30% 1RM), showed no difference (interaction effect, p = 0.904). In RPE and PSD, values increased significantly from rest to post-exercise (time effect, p = 0.001) for both protocols and did not present a significant difference (interaction effect, p = 0.205 / p = 0.180), respectively. The BP behavior (time effect, p = 0.001) showed a significant difference in both protocols, and did not present a significant difference in the protocol (BI 30% 1RM + BFR) (interaction effect, p = 0.759) (BI 30% 1RM) (interaction effect, p = 0.034). In relation to HR, both protocols had a significant difference (time effect, p = 0.001), and did not present differences between groups (interaction effect, p = 0.322 / p = 0.502). In muscle activation, differences were found during the series (time effect, p = 0.001) for both protocols, and no difference was found between groups (interaction effect, p = 0.320). Our findings indicate what was expected in relation to the responses of the investigated variables. Regarding the pre and post moments, all presented increased values, whereas in the comparison between groups some variables indicate that the groups investigated have particularities in relation to the type of training they practice.