Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Wright, Ben; Antrobus, Mark; Jones, Peter and Baross, Anthony
(2025).
URL: https://sport-science.org/index.php/ecss-rimini-20...
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:
Isometric resistance training (IRT) is an alternative, time-efficient approach to hypertension management [1]. Yet established methods have restricted exercise variability and present participation barriers, including access to and cost of specialised non-portable equipment [2]. A novel cost-effective isometric training band (ITB) has safely demonstrated significant blood pressure (BP) reductions [3]. However, efficacy in pre- and hypertensive adults in unsupervised environments is yet to be established. Therefore, the present study compared the effects of an 8-week, home-based multi-exercise ITB intervention to volume matched isometric handgrip (IHG) on resting, and ambulatory blood pressure in pre- and hypertensive adults.
METHODS:
Using a parallel randomised control trial, thirty-eight pre-hypertensive (n = 17, sBP 135 ± 1 mmHg) and stage 1 hypertensive (n = 21, 147 ± 6 mmHg) adults were recruited into a control (CON, n =13), IHG (n =13) or ITB (n =12) group. Resting systolic (sBP), diastolic (dBP), mean arterial pressure (mBP), heart rate (HR) and ambulatory BP (24-hour, daytime, night-time) were measured at baseline and following 4, and 8 weeks of unsupervised home-based IRT (4 x 2-min bouts, 3x week). Data were analysed using factorial ANOVAs (time [pre-, mid- and post-testing] x group [CON, ITB, and IHG]) to examine any significant within and between group differences, with post-hoc effect sizes calculated using Cohen’s d.
RESULTS:
After 4 weeks resting sBP significantly reduced in the IHG (10.2 ± 4.1 mmHg, d = -1.63) but not in the ITB group (1.8 ± 4.1 mmHg, d = -0.56). Following 8 weeks resting sBP significantly decreased for both training groups (ITB: 9.0 ± 3.2 mmHg, d = -1.36; IHG: 12.0 ± 3.1 mmHg, d = -1.48) compared to CON, although not significant between training groups (2.3 ± 3.2 mmHg, d = 0.32). Comparably, significant reductions in 24-hour (ITB: 7.6 ± 1.5 mmHg, d = 1.42; IHG: 6.9 ± 1.5 mmHg, d = 1.33), daytime (ITB: 7.3 ± 1.6 mmHg, d = 1.33; IHG: 6.3 ± 1.5 mmHg, d = 1.21), and night-time sBP (ITB: 8.5 ± 1.7 mmHg, d = 1.39; IHG: 8.8 ± 2.1 mmHg, d = 1.38) occurred for both training groups after 8 weeks. Whereas reductions in 24-hour (6.2 ± 1.4 mmHg, d = 1.2) and daytime mBP (6.7 ± 2.5 mmHg, d = 1.16) occurred in the ITB group only. No significant decreases in resting or ambulatory dBP or HR occurred for either group.
CONCLUSION:
The BP reductions in both training groups provide further evidence for the efficacy of IRT, however, results suggest the onset of effects may vary depending on modality. Importantly, the equivalent sBP reductions between training groups at 8 weeks highlight the potential of the ITB as a versatile, cost-effective, and accessible approach to IRT for BP management in pre- and hypertensive populations.
References
1. Edwards et al. (2023). Br J Sports Med. 57(20): 1317–1326.
2. Cornelissen, V.A. (2023). Blood Pressure. 32(1): 2208232.
3. Wright et al. (2023). Eur. J. Public Health. 33(1): 133-168.
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
