Standard V <scp>o</scp> <sub>2</sub> measures underestimate metabolic demand during blood flow-restricted exercise

Systemic oxygen consumption (V̇o<sub>2</sub>) has traditionally been the gold standard for assessing aerobic metabolic demand. However, under conditions that alter normal blood flow or ventilation, such as blood flow restriction (BFR), V̇o<sub>2</sub> may no longer reflect metabolic cost. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the total oxygen requirement (Vo<sub>2</sub>) of walking with and without BFR, including in-exercise Vo<sub>2</sub> and excess postexercise oxygen consumption (EPOC). In a randomized crossover design, 18 recreationally active participants completed three, 3-min treadmill walking bouts, each separated by a 1-min standing rest to simulate a typical repeated BFR protocol. In the BFR condition, tourniquets were applied to the upper thighs at 100% of the limb occlusion pressure throughout the interval protocol and removed for 15 min of seated recovery. Expired gasses were recorded continuously. Walking Vo<sub>2</sub> was initially lower in the BFR condition compared with control (CON) (<i>P</i> = 0.0002), but reversed over time, with BFR producing a greater total walking Vo<sub>2</sub> (BFR: 16,638 ± 2,157 mL; CON: 15,219 ± 2,444 mL; <i>P</i> = 0.0006) and higher EPOC (BFR: 7,789 ± 837 mL; CON: 6,267 ± 1,102 mL; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). The relative contribution of EPOC to total oxygen demand was elevated with BFR (BFR: 32.0 ± 2.8%; CON: 29.2 ± 2.1%; <i>P</i> = 0.0012), together indicating a time-dependent shift in V̇o<sub>2</sub>. This suggests that acute, rate-based V̇o<sub>2</sub> does not fully capture the true metabolic demands of BFR exercise. Researchers should instead consider the total oxygen and recovery when interpreting metabolic load during BFR.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This study challenges the reliability of V̇o<sub>2</sub> as a standalone marker of metabolic demand during blood flow-restricted (BFR) exercise. Although V̇o<sub>2</sub> during BFR walking was initially lower, a delayed rise during and prolonged recovery following BFR resulted in a greater total oxygen cost and excess postexercise oxygen consumption (EPOC). We suggest a temporal shift of oxygen dynamics, reflecting altered timing of uptake and recovery. Total oxygen uptake should be considered with BFR exercise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
2026-01-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00715.2025
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
51.14
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Standard V o 2 measures underestimate metabolic demand during blood flow-restricted exercise

Jamie F. Burr, Devin G. McCarthy, Avery Bendell
1 citations
Journal of Applied Physiology
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
51.14
article

Standard V o 2 measures underestimate metabolic demand during blood flow-restricted exercise

Jamie F. Burr, Devin G. McCarthy, Avery Bendell
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Systemic oxygen consumption (V̇o<sub>2</sub>) has traditionally been the gold standard for assessing aerobic metabolic demand. However, under conditions that alter normal blood flow or ventilation, such as blood flow restriction (BFR), V̇o<sub>2</sub> may no longer reflect metabolic cost. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the total oxygen requirement (Vo<sub>2</sub>) of walking with and without BFR, including in-exercise Vo<sub>2</sub> and excess postexercise oxygen consumption (EPOC). In a randomized crossover design, 18 recreationally active participants completed three, 3-min treadmill walking bouts, each separated by a 1-min standing rest to simulate a typical repeated BFR protocol. In the BFR condition, tourniquets were applied to the upper thighs at 100% of the limb occlusion pressure throughout the interval protocol and removed for 15 min of seated recovery. Expired gasses were recorded continuously. Walking Vo<sub>2</sub> was initially lower in the BFR condition compared with control (CON) (<i>P</i> = 0.0002), but reversed over time, with BFR producing a greater total walking Vo<sub>2</sub> (BFR: 16,638 ± 2,157 mL; CON: 15,219 ± 2,444 mL; <i>P</i> = 0.0006) and higher EPOC (BFR: 7,789 ± 837 mL; CON: 6,267 ± 1,102 mL; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). The relative contribution of EPOC to total oxygen demand was elevated with BFR (BFR: 32.0 ± 2.8%; CON: 29.2 ± 2.1%; <i>P</i> = 0.0012), together indicating a time-dependent shift in V̇o<sub>2</sub>. This suggests that acute, rate-based V̇o<sub>2</sub> does not fully capture the true metabolic demands of BFR exercise. Researchers should instead consider the total oxygen and recovery when interpreting metabolic load during BFR.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This study challenges the reliability of V̇o<sub>2</sub> as a standalone marker of metabolic demand during blood flow-restricted (BFR) exercise. Although V̇o<sub>2</sub> during BFR walking was initially lower, a delayed rise during and prolonged recovery following BFR resulted in a greater total oxygen cost and excess postexercise oxygen consumption (EPOC). We suggest a temporal shift of oxygen dynamics, reflecting altered timing of uptake and recovery. Total oxygen uptake should be considered with BFR exercise.

Journal of Applied PhysiologyVol. 140(2)
University of Guelph (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
51.14
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.