Trial reportScientific reports2025
Effects of blood flow restriction combined with electrical stimulation on muscle functions and performance in university football players with knee osteoarthritis.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of combining blood flow restriction training (BFRT) with electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) on muscle functions and sports performance in football players with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted on 64 football players diagnosed with KOA at Chengdu Sport University. Participants were enrolled based on predefined eligibility criteria and randomly allocated to four groups: the control group (CTR, n = 16), BFRT-alone group (BFRT, n = 16), EMS-alone group (EMS, n = 16), and BFRT combined with EMS group (CMB, n = 16). Data were gathered via the 10-meter sprint, 20-meter sprint, countermovement jump (CMJ), and Illinois agility test (IAT) to assess sports performance. Additionally, peak torque (PT) was used to measure muscle strength, the root mean square (RMS) was used to assess muscle activation, and the cross-sectional area (CSA) was used to evaluate muscle volume. The data were statistically analyzed via SPSS software, and a p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Following the 8-week intervention, the CMB group showed a more pronounced change in the 10-m sprint compared to the CTR group (p < 0.001) and exhibited significant differences in the 20-m sprint (CTR: p < 0.001, BFRT: p = 0.015, EMS: p < 0.001), CMJ (CTR: p < 0.001, BFRT: p = 0.019, EMS: p < 0.001), and IAT (CTR: p < 0.001, BFRT: p = 0.009, EMS: p = 0.018), outperforming the other three groups. To PT, the CMB groups demonstrated significant superiority over the other three groups (CTR: p < 0.001, BFRT: p < 0.001, EMS: p < 0.001), while the BFRT group exhibited a notable difference in PT than the EMS group (p = 0.032). Concerning RMS, the EMS and CMB groups showed significant differences from the CTR (EMS: p < 0.001, CMB: p < 0.001) and BFRT (EMS: p = 0.019, CMB: p < 0.001) groups, whereas the change in the BFRT group was more significant than that in the CTR group (p = 0.007). For CSA, the BFRT and CMB groups presented notable differences from the CTR (BFRT: p = 0.008, CMB: p = 0.002)and EMS (BFRT: p = 0.014, CMB: p = 0.004) groups. In summary, the results suggest that BFRT combined with EMS can increase muscle strength in male football players with KOA through improving muscle volume and neuromuscular recruitment under low-intensity resistance training, thereby increasing explosive power and agility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.