Research
Cellular
Both LL-BFR and HL-RT resulted in similar increases in quadriceps cross-sectional area (QCSA) (7.0 ± 3.8% for LL-BFR and 6.3 ± 4.1% for HL-RT).
Both training methods can be effective for muscle growth, allowing flexibility in training choices.
StrongSupportsmedium confidence
Both LL-BFR and HL-RT were similarly effective in increasing QCSA (7.0 ± 3.8% and 6.3 ± 4.1%, respectively; both p < 0.0001).
Why this rating
Based on the study design comparing two training protocols.
Source
Perceptual and Neuromuscular Responses Adapt Similarly Between High-Load Resistance Training and Low-Load Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction
Emerson Luiz Teixeira et al. · The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2020
DOI 10.1519/jsc.0000000000003879
other · n=16Cited 28×
Read the paper DOI resolved against Crossref · corpus check 2026-06-10
More from this paper
- Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) produces lower rating of perceived exertion (RPE) values (6.8 ± 1.1) compared to high-load resistance training (HL-RT) (8.1 ± 0.8) before training.Strong
- Muscle strength (1 repetition maximum) increased more in HL-RT (13.7 ± 5.9%) compared to LL-BFR (6.9 ± 4.1%).Strong
Related findings · Cellular
- Athletes aiming to reduce fat mass and preserve FFM should consume protein intakes in the range of ∼1.8-2.7 g kg(-1) d(-1).Strong
- A minimum daily protein intake of ≥1.6 g/kg is necessary to observe significant improvements in muscle mass from whey protein supplementation.Strong
- Most athletes ideally need 1.2 to 2.0 grams/kg of body weight/day of protein, preferably split across 3-4 meals.Strong
This is one finding among thousands. Every one is graded and traced to its source, so you can see what the evidence actually supports. Browse the research →