NCT06815367

Pneumatic Compression vs Blood Flow Restriction for Muscle Recovery

Comparing the Effects of Pneumatic Compression and Blood Flow Restriction Therapy on Muscle Recovery

• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 33 (estimated)
• Sponsor: University of Southern California · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 30 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Accepted

Summary

Both BFR and intermittent pneumatic compression are purported to decrease symptoms associated with exercise induced muscle damage (EIMD) that cause delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Blood flow restriction relies on applying pressurized cuffs to the most proximal portion of the limb. Another form of recovery often relied upon is pneumatic compression. The mechanism by which pneumatic compression works is similar to that of a massage, whereby the device progressively increases the pressure on a portion of the limb before releasing and moving further up the limb.The purpose of this study is determine whether BFR or pneumatic compression can be used to decreased DOMS which may indicate enhanced recovery.

Conditions

• Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
DEVICE	Pneumatic Compression	Following downhill running protocol, participants will complete 20 minutes of pneumatic compression at 100 mmHg.
DEVICE	Blood Flow Restriction	Following the downhill running protocol, participants will complete 4 rounds of treatment: 3 minutes at 100% resting limb occlusion pressure, 2 minutes of 0% resting limb occlusion pressure.

Timeline

• Start date: 2024-01-15
• Primary completion: 2025-12-01
• Completion: 2026-05-01
• First posted: 2025-02-07
• Last updated: 2026-03-30

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United States