Efectos del entrenamiento de restricción del flujo sanguíneo con carga baja sobre el rendimiento y las lesiones en futbolistas amateurs: un ensayo controlado aleatorizado
Video Experimental Relacionado
Updated: Jun 28, 2026
An Inertial Measurement Unit Based Method to Estimate Hip and Knee Joint Kinematics in Team Sport Athletes on the Field
Published on: May 26, 2020
Begüm Kara Kaya1, Ayşe Zengin Alpözgen2, Mehmet Rahmi Alpözgen3
1Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation (English), Faculty of Health Sciences, Biruni University, Istanbul, Türkiye. bkara@biruni.edu.tr.
Background:
Blood flow restriction (BFR) has gained interest in its application in exercise and potential benefits. This study aimed to investigate the effects of low-load, low-frequency BFR training compared with traditional high-intensity training on soccer-related performance outcomes and injury indicators in amateur athletes.
Methods:
Twenty licensed male soccer players competing in a university-level league were randomized to either a BFR group (n = 10, 22.3 ± 1.3 years) or a control group (n = 10, 22.1 ± 1.8 years) for 6 weeks of training. Pre- and post-intervention assessments included muscle strength-endurance (isokinetic dynamometer), power (vertical jump test), aerobic endurance (Yo-Yo level 1 test), speed-agility (T test, Y-shaped reactive agility test), dynamic balance (Y test), thigh circumference, fatigue (blood lactate, Borg scale), and sportive self-confidence. Perceived change (GROC) was assessed post-intervention. Injury data were tracked for six months following the intervention.
Results:
BFR improved dominant limb flexor strength, endurance, aerobic capacity, speed, and dynamic balance (p < 0.05, Cohen's d: 0.40-1.06). Both groups showed gains in power, agility, and self-confidence (p < 0.05, Cohen's d: BFR = 0.51-1.35; Control = 0.40-1.01), whereas hypertrophy (p = 0.026, Pη2 = 0.24) and GROC scores (p = 0.022) were significantly higher in the BFR group than in the control group. No differences were observed in terms of fatigue. The standard error of the mean values for significant within-group changes ranged from 0.03 to 8.64. Although the injury rate was lower in the BFR group, this trend was not significant (p > 0.05).
Conclusion:
BFR appears to be a feasible, load-efficient, and well-tolerated approach to improve performance parameters in amateur soccer players, with potential benefits for lower-limb injury prevention.
Trial Registration:
Prior to participant enrollment, this study was prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05452109 first submitted on June 1, 2022).
