ArticleCureus2025
Trends and Practices on Blood Flow Restriction Training Are Not Largely Aligned With the Contemporary Evidence.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate trends and current clinical practice of physiotherapists on blood flow restriction training (BFRT) application.
methodsAn 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.
resultsMost 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.