Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 8;34(4):275–283. doi: 10.1589/jpts.34.275

Table 1. Descriptive characteristic of study sample (n=112).

Age (years), mean ± SD 40.0 ± 9.7
Gender, Female (%) 28 (25%)
Race/Ethnicity
Caucasian 102 (91%)
Non-Hispanic 104 (93%)
Profession (Select as many as apply)
Physical therapist/PT assistant 89 (80%)
Athletic trainer 29 (26%)
Certified strength & Conditioning specialist 15 (13%)
PhD/EdD/DSc 3 (3%)
Chiropractor 2 (2%)
Certified exercise physiologist 1 (1%)
Medical doctor/Physician assistant 1 (1%)
Occupational therapist/OT aassistant 1 (1%)
Other 2 (2%)
Practice setting (Select as many as apply)
Private practice (non-hospital affiliated) 61 (55%)
Hospital-affiliated outpatient clinic (non-VA) 27 (24%)
Sports team (professional, collegiate, or amateur) 24 (21%)
Academic/Research setting 11 (10%)
Military/VA outpatient clinic 7 (6%)
Hospital inpatient setting (non-VA) 4 (4%)
Health club/fitness facility 3 (3%)
Military/VA inpatient setting 0 (0%)
Other 6 (5%)
Time using BFR as part of practice
<1 year 4 (4%)
1–3 years 58 (52%)
3–5 years 35 (31%)
5–10 years 15 (13%)
BFR safety in people with neurologic conditions
Yes, it is generally safe 100 (89%)
Unsure if it is safe or not 12 (11%)
No, it is not generally safe 0 (0%)
Percent of people with neurologic conditions on caseload
None 29 (26%)
1–10% 63 (56%)
11–25% 14 (13%)
26–50% 2 (2%)
>50% 4 (4%)
BFR use in ≥1 patient with a neurologic condition
Yes 43 (38%)
Unsure 69 (62%)

BFR: Blood-flow restriction; VA: Veteran’s affairs.