Key result
Physiotherapist BFRT practices vary significantly and largely fail to align with current scientific evidence.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate trends and current clinical practice among physiotherapists regarding the application of blood flow restriction training.
What are the trends and current clinical practices of physiotherapists regarding blood flow restriction training?
Cross-Sectional (n=103)
What are the trends and current clinical practices of physiotherapists regarding blood flow restriction training?
Current blood flow restriction training practices among physiotherapists show significant variability and are largely not aligned with contemporary scientific evidence.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends and current clinical practice of physiotherapists on blood flow restriction training (BFRT) application. METHODS: An online survey was conducted to assess: a) demographics and professional characteristics, b) specifics of BFRT application, and c) safety and adverse events. We tested using Pearson's Chi-square test whether the physiotherapist's characteristics were independent of their years of experience and formal BFR education. RESULTS: Most respondents reported having much confidence (n=47, 44.6%) in using BFRT, and they used it for a mean of 2.6±1.7 years. Significant variability among respondents was found in devices used, limb occlusion pressure calculation methods, the reperfusion scheme, the number of exercises implemented, and the percentage of complete occlusion pressure used for exercising. Most used BFRT in musculoskeletal conditions of the upper and lower limb (n=88, 86.3%), aiming improvements in strength and muscle volume (n=93, 90.3%), by using external load (n=82, 79.6%). The majority of the respondents (n=69, 67.0% attended a short course for BFRT, of which 55.1% (n=56) believed it was not evidence-based. No significant associations were found between the years of experience or attendance in a BFRT course with practices and perceptions of the surveyed physiotherapists (all p>0.05). Conclusion: Current BFRT practices are largely not aligned with contemporary scientific evidence and recommendations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Korakakis et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Physiotherapists using blood flow restriction training (n=103). Blood flow restriction training (BFRT) practices and perceptions was evaluated on Trends and current clinical practice of physiotherapists on blood flow restriction training application. A survey of 103 physiotherapists revealed that current blood flow restriction training practices demonstrate significant variability and are largely not aligned with contemporary scientific evidence.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: