## 4 Discussion
While previous research suggests that low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) can elicit neuromuscular adaptations comparable to high-load training, the evidence remains inconsistent,with some studies reporting minimal acute or long-term effects [34; 35; 36; 37]. Despite the progressive loading, our findings indicate no significant alterations in RFD kinetics, suggesting that the imposed physiological conditions were insufficient to acutely influence rapid force production. Although higher occlusion pressures have been associated with increased neuromuscular activation and fatigue-induced performance decline [38; 39], our results suggest that the applied load and occlusion levels did not reach the threshold necessary to induce meaningful changes in early-phase force production. The decision to employ a single-joint task was based on the need to isolate quadriceps fatigue and reduce the influence of inter-joint coordination variability typically present in multi-joint movements. This provided a controlled stimulus prior to IMTP testing. However, this design limits the ecological validity of the results, as multi-joint tasks are more functionally representative of athletic performance. Future studies should explore whether similar kinetic responses to BFR occur when fatigue is induced through compound exercises such as squats or deadlifts. These considerations raise important questions regarding protocol design and the specificity of BFR responses across task types and populations. While this study focused on young, recreationally active women, future research should explore variations in training status, fiber-type composition, and hormonal background to determine their moderating role in BFR efficacy. Previous studies have demonstrated that the RFD is highly sensitive to neuromuscular fatigue, motor unit recruitment, and tendon stiffness adaptations [40; 41; 42]. Given the known impact of BFR on neuromuscular activation, it was expected that ischemic stress would acutely influence RFD kinetics [35; 43]. However, the findings of this study contrast with prior evidence suggesting that BFR enhances explosive force production, particularly under low-load dynamic conditions [43; 44]. The absence of statistically significant differences within and between subjects across the 50, 150, and 250 ms time windows suggests that brief exposure to blood flow restriction (BFR) may not acutely alter motor unit recruitment patterns or force transmission efficiency in an isometric context, which is consistent with the findings of [PERSON] [45]. A critical consideration when interpreting these results is the recovery trajectory of neuromuscular performance after BFR application. Although dynamic tasks frequently exhibit immediate fatigue-induced decrements followed by post-occlusion hyperemia and neuromuscular potentiation [46], the present findings suggest that these effects may not translate to isometric force production. The absence of significant within-subject effects across all time windows suggests that potential BFR-induced neuromuscular adjustments, such as increased motor unit recruitment or altered tendon compliance, did not occur within the analyzed recovery period [23; 38]. The observed differences may be attributed to variations in metabolic stress between isometric and dynamic contractions or to the exercise selection in this study. While previous studies have shown that blood flow restriction induces greater lactate accumulation and muscle swelling during dynamic tasks compared to sustained isometric contractions [47; 48; 49], the present study focused exclusively on kinetic outcomes without incorporating physiological or metabolic markers. Another plausible explanation lies in the post-BFR recovery trajectory. Studies have shown that dynamic tasks subjected to BFR often exhibit transient performance decrements followed by enhanced muscle perfusion and potentiation post-deflation [50; 51].