Korakakis Vasileios, Korakaki Alexandra, Korakaki Themida, Karanasios Stefanos, Kotsifaki Roula
Department of Health Sciences, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, CYP.
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, University of Thessaly, Trikala, GRC.
Cureus. 2025 Apr 5;17(4):e81766. doi: 10.7759/cureus.81766. eCollection 2025 Apr.
To evaluate trends and current clinical practice of physiotherapists on blood flow restriction training (BFRT) application.
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.
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.
评估物理治疗师应用血流限制训练（BFRT）的趋势和当前临床实践。
进行了一项在线调查，以评估：a）人口统计学和专业特征，b）BFRT应用的具体情况，以及c）安全性和不良事件。我们使用Pearson卡方检验来测试物理治疗师的特征是否独立于他们的经验年限和正式的BFR教育。
大多数受访者表示对使用BFRT非常有信心（n = 47，44.6%），他们使用BFRT的平均时间为2.6±1.7年。在使用的设备、肢体闭塞压力计算方法、再灌注方案、实施的锻炼次数以及用于锻炼的完全闭塞压力百分比方面，受访者之间存在显著差异。大多数人在上下肢的肌肉骨骼疾病中使用BFRT（n = 88，86.3%），旨在通过使用外部负荷（n = 82，79.6%）来增强力量和增加肌肉体积（n = 93，90.3%）。大多数受访者（n = 69，67.0%）参加了BFRT短期课程，其中55.1%（n = 56）认为该课程缺乏循证依据。在经验年限或参加BFRT课程与受访物理治疗师的实践和认知之间未发现显著关联（所有p>0.05）。结论：当前的BFRT实践在很大程度上与当代科学证据和建议不一致。
