Cardiovascular, perceptual, and performance responses to single- vs. multi-chambered blood flow restriction cuffs
Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024 · Vol 6 · 1469356
Dr. Nicholas Rolnick · First author
Abstract
Introduction. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the blood flow restriction bladder type (single- [SC-BFR] vs. multi-chambered [MC-BFR]) on exercise performance, cardiovascular responses, and perceptual experiences with exercise sessions incorporating multiple sets to volitional failure in a randomized, crossover experimental design.
Methods. Twenty-seven healthy, physically active participants (age: 22.6 ± 5.7; weight: 74.3 ± 15.8 kg; height: 171.7 ± 7.7 cm; BMI: 25.0 ± 4.1 kg/m2; ∼93% reported regular resistance training within 6 months; 11 females) randomly performed exercise to failure (4× sets to failure, 20% 1RM, 1 min rest between sets) in each of three conditions: SC-BFR (using the Delfi Personalized Tourniquet Device inflated to 60% limb occlusion pressure), MC-BFR (using the B Strong Cuffs inflated to 300 mmHg according to manufacturer recommendations), and N-BFR (no BFR control).
Results. SC-BFR blunted post-exercise increases in carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (p = 0.328) (+3.3%) whereas the other conditions showed elevations (MC-BFR +11.8% [p = 0.041], N-BFR +9.3% [p = 0.012]). Discomfort was lower in N-BFR compared to SC-BFR (p < 0.001) and MC-BFR (p = 0.035) but all displayed similar exertion (p = 0.176). Median total repetitions achieved were significantly less in SC-BFR (57 [25-75th percentile: 47-65) than MC-BFR (76 [63-91] (p = 0.043) and N-BFR [106 (97-148)] p = 0.005). Per set repetition volumes were similar on set 1 between SC-BFR (p < 0.001) and MC-BFR (p = 0.001) and were lower than N-BFR (p ≤ 0.001) whereas in sets 2-4, MC-BFR performed similar number of repetitions as N-BFR (p = 0.984-1.000).
Conclusion. Bladder design of a BFR cuff has an impact on the acute responses to exercise if applied according to recommended application guidelines, as SC-BFR impacts performance to a greater degree and mitigates post-exercise arterial stiffness responses compared to MC-BFR and N-BFR while both BFR conditions display greater levels of discomfort compared to N-BFR.
Clinical Trial Registration. NCT06276673.
Authors
Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Masoud Moghaddam, Evan Peikon, Susannah Taylor, Samantha Watson, Campbell Ruffhead, Sean Zupnik, Tim Werner
Dr. Nicholas Rolnick’s contribution: First author
Keywords
- B Strong
- Delfi
- arterial occlusion pressure
- bladder
- multi-chamber
- resistance training
Read the full paper
Cite this paper
Nicholas Rolnick, Victor S de Queiros, Masoud Moghaddam, Evan Peikon, Susannah Taylor, Samantha Watson, Campbell Ruffhead, Sean Zupnik, Tim Werner. (2024). Cardiovascular, perceptual, and performance responses to single- vs. multi-chambered blood flow restriction cuffs. Frontiers in sports and active living, 6, 1469356. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1469356
Related research
More from this line of work
Journal article · 2025
Impact of blood flow restriction cuff design on upper body exercise: A randomized crossover trial in resistance-trained adults
Read the record
Journal article · 2024
Impact of limb occlusion pressure assessment position on performance, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses in blood flow restricted low-load resistance exercise: A randomized crossover trial
Read the record
Journal article · 2024
Unpacking the blood flow restriction device features literature: multi-chambered bladder design
Read the record
Apply the research
From the paper to the patient
Every protocol in The Complete BFR Certification cites the literature it came from, including this line of work. The module-by-module bibliography (Bonus 5) maps each claim back to its paper.

