Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Physiol.
Sec. Exercise Physiology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fphys.2024.1507445

Salivary Testosterone and Cortisol Responses to Seven Weeks of Practical Blood Flow Restriction Training in Collegiate American Football Players

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 John “Doc” Baxter Athletic Training & Human Performance Lab, Emporia State University, Emporia, Kansas, United States
  • 2 Jayhawk Athletic Performance Laboratory – Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance, University of Kansas, Lawrence, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a 7-week supplemental BFR training intervention on both acute and chronic alterations in salivary testosterone (sTes) and cortisol (sCort) in collegiate American football players. Methods: 58 males were divided into 4 groups: 3 completed an upper-and lower-body split resistance training routine (H, H/S, H/S/R; H=Heavy, S=Supplemental, R=BFR), with H/S/R performing end-of-session practical BFR training, and H/S serving as the volumematched non-BFR group. The final group (M/S/R) completed modified resistance training programming with the same practical BFR protocol as H/S/R. Athletes were further split into AM and PM training groups based upon their pre-determined training schedules, in cooperation with University strength and conditioning staff. Practical BFR consisted of end-of-session barbell bench press and back squat using 20% 1 repetition maximum (1RM) for 30-20-20-20 repetitions across 4 sets, with 45-seconds rest. Saliva samples were taken pre-and post-the first lower-body training sessions in week 1 and week 7 (i.e., test 1 and test 2) of the program, yielding four total. sTes and sCort were analyzed using 4-way (4x2x2x2) mixed model ANOVA's. Results: Hormonal variables all exhibited main effects for time-of-day (p<.001). A significant group x time interaction effect (F3,50=3.246, p<.05) indicated increases in sTes post-training cycle for the H/S/R group only. Further, PM post-exercise sCort decreased from test 1 to test 2 (nmol•L -1 : 95% CI: PM test 1 post-exercise=10.7-17.1, PM test 2 post-exercise=5.0-8.9). For the testosterone-tocortisol ratio (T/C), AM pre-exercise was lower than PM (p<.05), with no change in post-exercise T/C for both AM and PM conditions when collapsed across testing times. Discussion: Overall, these findings suggest an ecologically valid method of BFR implementation is capable of inducing heightened concentrations of sTes in well-resistance trained American football athletes, providing additional insight on possible physiological mechanisms underpinning BFR's ability to elicit beneficial muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength adaptations when performed during regimented training programs. Additionally, notable rises in T/C, and a null sCort response post-exercise were observed post-program for all groups, possibly indicative of positive physiological adaptation.

    Keywords: strength and power sport, Athletes, Resistance exercise, vascular occlusion, Endocrinology

    Received: 07 Oct 2024; Accepted: 20 Dec 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Luebbers, Kriley, Eserhaut, Andre, Butler and Fry. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Drake A Eserhaut, Jayhawk Athletic Performance Laboratory – Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance, University of Kansas, Lawrence, United States

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.