Effect Of Six-Week Blood Flow Restriction Combined With Neuromuscular Training On Patellar Pain Syndrome

Objective: This study investigated the effects of blood flow restriction muscle training,neuromuscular training and blood flow restriction combined with neuromuscular training on knee muscle strength,balance,motor function and rehabilitation efficacy in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome,and provided a reference basis for the development of rehabilitation training programs for patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome.Methods: According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,33 students with patellofemoral pain syndrome(PFPS)who were enrolled in Guangzhou Sports Institute were enrolled in the study.33 subjects were randomly divided into blood flow restriction muscle training group(group A,n=11),neuromuscular training group(group B,n=11),and blood flow restriction combined with neuromuscular training group(group C,n=11).muscle training group(group C,n=11).All three groups were trained twice/week for a total of 6 weeks,in which group A performed muscle strength training of knee flexors and extensors and gluteal muscle groups through blood flow restriction,group B used neuromuscular training,and group C performed neuromuscular training under blood flow restriction,and the time spent in all three groups was the same,and the subjects’ visual analogue scale(VAS),lower limb strength,balance function,and balance were measured before and after the intervention.The strength,balance,Kujala anterior knee pain scale(AKPS)and motor function of the lower limbs were assessed before and after the intervention.Data were processed using IBM SPSS 24.0 for statistical analysis,and P < 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference.Results: 1.VAS scores: intra-group comparison: the VAS scores of all three groups were lower after the intervention than before the training,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Between-group comparison: VAS scores in group A were lower than those in group B after the intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05);VAS scores in group C were lower than those in group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).2.peak muscle moment: intra-group comparison: peak muscle moment increased in both groups A and C after the intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Between-group comparison: the peak muscle moment of group A was higher than that of group B after the intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05),and the peak muscle moment of group C was higher than that of group B,and the difference was statistically significant(p<0.05),and there was no statistically significant comparison between the peak muscle moment values of groups A and C(P>0.05).3.Y balance test: intra-group comparison: the distance in each direction increased in all three groups,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Between-group comparison: the distance in each direction in group C was higher than that in group A after the intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(p<0.01),and the distance in each direction in group C was higher than that in group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05),and the difference between groups A and B was not statistically significant(P>0.05).4.AKPS score: intra-group comparison: AKPS score increased in all three groups after intervention(P<0.05),and the difference was statistically significant.Between-group comparison: AKPS scores in group C were higher than those in group A after intervention,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05),AKPS scores in group C were higher than those in group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05),and the differences between groups A and B were not statistically significant(P>0.05).5.Longitudinal jump touch height test: intra-group comparison: the longitudinal jump height increased in both groups A and C after intervention compared with that before intervention(P<0.05).Comparison between groups: There was no statistically significant difference in longitudinal jump height between the groups after intervention(P>0.05).6.Three motor function tests: intra-group comparison: after the intervention,the fold-and-run test in group A,the carioca and co-contraction test in group B,and the three motor tests in group C all improved,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).Comparison between groups: After the intervention,the scores of folding run test in group A were higher than those in group B(P<0.05),and the differences were statistically significant.The scores of carioca and co-contraction test in groups B and C were higher than those in group A,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05),and the scores of folding run test in group C were higher than those in group B(P<0.05),and the differences were statistically significant.When comparing the folding run test in group A and group C,and the carioca and co-contraction test in group B and group C after the intervention,the differences between the groups were not statistically significant(p>0.05).Conclusion: 1.Blood flow restriction training and blood flow restriction combined with neuromuscular training can enhance muscle strength and relieve pain symptoms in patients with PFPS.2.Blood flow restriction combined with neuromuscular training can improve knee balance and athletic performance compared to blood flow restriction alone,helping athletes with PFPS return to play faster.3.Blood flow restriction combined with neuromuscular training can increase the benefits of wearing a blood flow restriction band compared to neuromuscular training cues,not only significantly increasing knee extension strength but also significantly relieving their pain symptoms.