Int J Sports Med 2009; 30(5): 320-324
DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1111109
Physiology & Biochemistry

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Muscle Strength and Pressor Response

J. U. Gonzales 1 , B. C. Thompson 2 , J. R. Thistlethwaite 2 , A. J. Harper 2 , B. W. Scheuermann 2
  • 1Department of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
  • 2Department of Kinesiology, The University of Toledo, Toledo, United States
Further Information

Publication History

accepted after revision October 6, 2008

Publication Date:
06 February 2009 (online)

Preview

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine if muscle strength influences the hyperemic response to dynamic exercise. Men with low (n=8) and high (n=9) maximal forearm strength performed dynamic handgrip exercise as the same absolute workload increased in a ramp function (0.5 kg·min−1). Forearm blood flow (FBF) was measured instantaneously by ultrasound Doppler and blood pressure was measured by auscultation. The pressor response to exercise was greater (P<0.05) for low strength men at workloads >1.5 kg allowing volumetric FBF (ml·min−1) and vascular conductance to increase in proportion to absolute workload similar to high strength men. When FBF was expressed relative to forearm volume (ml·min−1·100 ml−1) the hyperemic response to exercise (slope of relative FBF vs. workload) was greater in low strength men (3.2±1.5 vs. 1.7±0.4 ml·min−1·100 ml−1·kg−1, P<0.05) as was relative FBF at workloads >1.5 kg. However, when relative FBF was compared across relative work intensity, no difference was found between low and high strength groups. Together, these findings suggest men with low strength require a greater pressor response to match blood flow to exercise intensity as compared to high strength men.

References

Correspondence

Dr. J. U. GonzalesPhD 

Department of Kinesiology

Pennsylvania State University

226 Noll Laboratory

University Park

16802 United States

Phone: +814/865/12 35

Fax: +814/865/46 02

Email: jug18@psu.edu