Resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been suggested to exaggerate the exercise pressor response over traditional non-BFR exercise. While applying BFR relative to an individual’s arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and exercising at low-loads seems to produce a comparable cardiovascular response to traditional moderate or high-load training, it is beneficial to identify modifications for reducing the cardiovascular response to BFR exercise. PURPOSE: To determine if unilateral (UNI), bilateral (BI), or alternating (ALT) exercise modalities elicit different cardiovascular responses during BFR exercise. METHODS: 18 participants (13 male and 5 female) performed four sets of UNI, BI, and ALT knee-extensions at 30% one-repetition maximum and 40% AOP. Pulse wave analysis was measured before and after exercise. Data were analyzed using Bayesian RMANOVA and presented as mean (SD). RESULTS: Changes in aortic systolic blood pressure, aortic diastolic blood pressure, and aortic mean arterial pressure were greater following ALT. Changes in aortic rate pressure product [ALT = 4873 (2479) mmHg * bpm, UNI = 3243 (1482) mmHg * bpm, BI = 3308 (1449) mmHg * bpm] were also higher following ALT. The volume of work performed was greater in ALT [ALT = 1946 (1787) kg, UNI = 945 (313) kg, BI = 918 (319) kg]. CONCLUSION: Given the greater cardiovascular response following alternating BFR exercise in healthy individuals, those at an increased risk of a cardiovascular event should instead choose unilateral or bilateral BFR exercise until further work is done to determine the degree to which this modality can be tolerated.
","abstract_html":"<p>Resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been suggested to exaggerate the exercise pressor response over traditional non-BFR exercise. While applying BFR relative to an individual’s arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and exercising at low-loads seems to produce a comparable cardiovascular response to traditional moderate or high-load training, it is beneficial to identify modifications for reducing the cardiovascular response to BFR exercise. PURPOSE: To determine if unilateral (UNI), bilateral (BI), or alternating (ALT) exercise modalities elicit different cardiovascular responses during BFR exercise. METHODS: 18 participants (13 male and 5 female) performed four sets of UNI, BI, and ALT knee-extensions at 30% one-repetition maximum and 40% AOP. Pulse wave analysis was measured before and after exercise. Data were analyzed using Bayesian RMANOVA and presented as mean (SD). RESULTS: Changes in aortic systolic blood pressure, aortic diastolic blood pressure, and aortic mean arterial pressure were greater following ALT. Changes in aortic rate pressure product [ALT = 4873 (2479) mmHg * bpm, UNI = 3243 (1482) mmHg * bpm, BI = 3308 (1449) mmHg * bpm] were also higher following ALT. The volume of work performed was greater in ALT [ALT = 1946 (1787) kg, UNI = 945 (313) kg, BI = 918 (319) kg]. CONCLUSION: Given the greater cardiovascular response following alternating BFR exercise in healthy individuals, those at an increased risk of a cardiovascular event should instead choose unilateral or bilateral BFR exercise until further work is done to determine the degree to which this modality can be tolerated.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Stanford, Daphney"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Science (MS)","degree_level":"Masters Thesis","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Matthew Jessee","Daniel Credeur","Stephanie McCoy"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019-08-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2019-08-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:45:12Z","subjects":["cardiovascular response","blood flow restriction","aortic","augmentation","wave reflection","blood pressure","Life Sciences","Medicine and Health Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/669","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Matthew Jessee","Daniel Credeur","Stephanie McCoy"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Stanford, Daphney"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2019-06-21T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Masters Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science (MS)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["cardiovascular response","blood flow restriction","aortic","augmentation","wave reflection","blood pressure","Life Sciences","Medicine and Health Sciences"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/669"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been suggested to exaggerate the exercise pressor response over traditional non-BFR exercise. While applying BFR relative to an individual’s arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and exercising at low-loads seems to produce a comparable cardiovascular response to traditional moderate or high-load training, it is beneficial to identify modifications for reducing the cardiovascular response to BFR exercise. PURPOSE: To determine if unilateral (UNI), bilateral (BI), or alternating (ALT) exercise modalities elicit different cardiovascular responses during BFR exercise. METHODS: 18 participants (13 male and 5 female) performed four sets of UNI, BI, and ALT knee-extensions at 30% one-repetition maximum and 40% AOP. Pulse wave analysis was measured before and after exercise. Data were analyzed using Bayesian RMANOVA and presented as mean (SD). RESULTS: Changes in aortic systolic blood pressure, aortic diastolic blood pressure, and aortic mean arterial pressure were greater following ALT. Changes in aortic rate pressure product [ALT = 4873 (2479) mmHg * bpm, UNI = 3243 (1482) mmHg * bpm, BI = 3308 (1449) mmHg * bpm] were also higher following ALT. The volume of work performed was greater in ALT [ALT = 1946 (1787) kg, UNI = 945 (313) kg, BI = 918 (319) kg]. CONCLUSION: Given the greater cardiovascular response following alternating BFR exercise in healthy individuals, those at an increased risk of a cardiovascular event should instead choose unilateral or bilateral BFR exercise until further work is done to determine the degree to which this modality can be tolerated.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Acute Cardiovascular Response to Low-Load Unilateral, Bilateral, and Alternating Resistance Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction in the Lower Body"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Matthew Jessee","Daniel Credeur","Stephanie McCoy"],"dc:creator":["Stanford, Daphney"],"dc:date.available":["2019-06-21T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) has been suggested to exaggerate the exercise pressor response over traditional non-BFR exercise. While applying BFR relative to an individual’s arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and exercising at low-loads seems to produce a comparable cardiovascular response to traditional moderate or high-load training, it is beneficial to identify modifications for reducing the cardiovascular response to BFR exercise. PURPOSE: To determine if unilateral (UNI), bilateral (BI), or alternating (ALT) exercise modalities elicit different cardiovascular responses during BFR exercise. METHODS: 18 participants (13 male and 5 female) performed four sets of UNI, BI, and ALT knee-extensions at 30% one-repetition maximum and 40% AOP. Pulse wave analysis was measured before and after exercise. Data were analyzed using Bayesian RMANOVA and presented as mean (SD). RESULTS: Changes in aortic systolic blood pressure, aortic diastolic blood pressure, and aortic mean arterial pressure were greater following ALT. Changes in aortic rate pressure product [ALT = 4873 (2479) mmHg * bpm, UNI = 3243 (1482) mmHg * bpm, BI = 3308 (1449) mmHg * bpm] were also higher following ALT. The volume of work performed was greater in ALT [ALT = 1946 (1787) kg, UNI = 945 (313) kg, BI = 918 (319) kg]. CONCLUSION: Given the greater cardiovascular response following alternating BFR exercise in healthy individuals, those at an increased risk of a cardiovascular event should instead choose unilateral or bilateral BFR exercise until further work is done to determine the degree to which this modality can be tolerated.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/669"],"dc:subject":["cardiovascular response","blood flow restriction","aortic","augmentation","wave reflection","blood pressure","Life Sciences","Medicine and Health Sciences"],"dc:title":["Acute Cardiovascular Response to Low-Load Unilateral, Bilateral, and Alternating Resistance Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction in the Lower Body"],"thesis:degree_level":["Masters Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science (MS)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:45:12Z"}