Comparação das respostas afetivas entre um treinamento com restrição de fluxo sanguíneo com baixa carga e um treinamento de alta carga em pacientes com osteoartrite de joelho: ensaio clínico randomizado e cego
Background: Resistance training is the main treatment for osteoarthritis (OA) however, studies have shown that high loads training (HLT) may be associated with higher levels of muscle soreness and displeasure, which can result in poor adherence. In addition, the affective responses (pleasure/displea...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/46164 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | Background: Resistance training is the main treatment for osteoarthritis (OA) however, studies have shown that high loads training (HLT) may be associated with higher levels of muscle soreness and displeasure, which can result in poor adherence. In addition, the affective responses (pleasure/displeasure) promote acceptance or rejection of an exercise protocol. Thus, low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LLT-BFR) has shown promise, as it brings similar benefits to HLT and uses low loads, which could reduce feelings of displeasure linked to exercise and improve adherence. Objective: to compare affective responses between TBC-RFS and HLT in patients with knee OA. Methods: study included participants aged more than 50 years older with a clinical diagnosis of OA. Affective responses to squat exercises on the hack machine and extension chair were evaluated by the Feeling Scale and adherence to training. The total training volume was analyzed considering the number of repetitions and the load every six sessions (Assessment 1: mean of sessions 1-6; Assessment 2: mean of 7-12; Assessment 3: mean of 13-18; Assessment 4: average of 19-24) for the hack machine and extension chair exercises. In addition, the final total volume was presented as the accumulation of the 24 training sessions. Participants were randomized into two groups: LLT-BFR (n=12) and HLT (n=11). LLT-BFR group performed 1x30 and 3x15 repetitions (10% of 1 repetition maximum (RM) + 60% of total restriction pressure) in the hack machine and knee extension exercises. HLT group performed 3x8 repetitions (60% of 1 RM + restriction with 10 mmHg) in the same exercises. Results: there was no difference between groups or between times for Feeling Scale (p>0.05). However, there was difference between the groups at all times for the total volume of the extension chair, in AV4 for the total volume of the hack machine and in AV3-AV4 for the final total volume of training (p<0.05). Conclusion: the results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference for affective responses between LLT-BFR and HLT over 24 sessions for patients with knee OA. |
|---|