Joel T. Cramer

Shoemaker, ME, Smith, CM, Gillen, ZM, and Cramer, JT. Sex differences in test-retest reliability of near-infrared spectroscopy during postocclusive reactive hyperemia of the vastus lateralis. J Strength Cond Res 38(2): e40–e48, 2024—The purpose of this study was to determine test-retest reliability for vascular reactivity measures and ranges for normalization of near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) variables from the vastus lateralis using postocclusive reactive hyperemia (PORH) procedure in male subjects, female subjects, and combined. Concentrations of oxygenated hemoglobin (Hb) + myoglobin (Mb) (O 2 Hb) and deoxygenated Hb + Mb (HHb) to derive total Hb + Mb (THb), difference in Hb + Mb signal (Hbdiff), and muscle tissue oxygen saturation (StO 2 ) from the vastus lateralis were measured during the PORH in 12 male subjects (age: 23.17 ± 1.77 years; stature: 180.88 ± 4.59 cm; and mass: 81.47 ± 9.68 kg) and 10 female subjects (age: 23.80 ± 2.07 years; stature: 165.95 ± 4.92 cm; and mass: 70.93 ± 10.55 kg) on 2 separate days. Adipose tissue thickness at the NIRS site was measured with ultrasonography. There were no significant differences between the mean values from visit 1 to visit 2 ( p > 0.076–0.985). In the composite sample, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) ranged from 0.35 to 0.91 and 4.74 to 39.18%, respectively. In male subjects, ICC and CV values ranged from 0.57 to 0.89 and 2.44 to 28.55%, respectively. In female subjects, ICC and CV values ranged from −0.05 to 0.75 and 7.83 to 61.19%, respectively. Although NIRS variables were overall reliable during PORH, when separated by sex, reliability in male subjects generally increased, whereas female subjects were not reliable, suggesting adipose tissue thickness may be a contributing factor. Understanding sex differences in reliability is important when using this technique for normalization or examining vascular reactivity during athletic performance. With greater utilization of NIRS monitoring in athletes to examine training adaptations, it is important for practitioners to understand the capabilities and potential limitations of the tool.