What the form is for, what each question is actually screening for, and what to do when somebody ticks yes.
Nearly every trainer uses a PAR-Q. Far fewer have decided in advance what they'll do when one comes back with a yes on it — which is the only part of the process that matters, because a screening that flags something and then gets filed anyway is worse than no screening at all. Now there's a document showing you were told.
This covers what the form is, what it can and can't tell you, and the decision you should make before your first client fills one in rather than while they're sitting in front of you.
The PAR-Q — Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire — is a short self-report screening form completed before somebody starts exercising. It came out of Canadian exercise physiology research and has been revised several times; the current version, the PAR-Q+, is maintained by the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology and made available free for use by exercise professionals in its unmodified form.
It's a triage tool, and a deliberately blunt one. Its entire job is to sort people into two groups: those who can begin exercising without further steps, and those who should speak to a physician first.
Because the current instrument is periodically revised, take the wording from the official CSEP source rather than a copy on somebody's website. Copies circulate for years after they've been superseded, and a form that cites a version withdrawn a decade ago is worth less than one that doesn't cite anything.
Three things people expect it to do that it does not do.
It is not a medical assessment. It doesn't diagnose, and it doesn't tell you whether somebody is safe to train. It tells you whether somebody with more training than you should be asked.
It is not a waiver. Different document, different purpose. A screening records what you asked and what they answered; a release of liability records what they accepted. Neither substitutes for the other.
It is not a fitness test. Movement screens, postural assessment and baseline measurements are all useful and none of them belong in this form.
The core questionnaire is a handful of yes/no questions, and rather than reproduce the current wording here — take that from the source — it's more useful to know what each one is reaching for.
Whether a doctor has ever said their heart condition means only medically supervised activity.
The highest-consequence question on the form. A yes here is not a "probably fine" — it's the one that most clearly means stop and get clearance.
Two separate questions in most versions, and the distinction matters.
Chest pain brought on by exertion and chest pain that arrives unprovoked are different signals. Both need a physician; the second is more urgent, and it's worth reading the answer carefully rather than registering it as "chest — yes".
Dizziness, fainting, losing balance from lightheadedness.
Frequently under-reported, because people who have experienced it tend to have normalised it. Also the one with the most immediate practical implications — it changes what you'd load, and where you'd stand.
Anything that could be made worse by activity.
The most commonly ticked box, and usually the least alarming. This is where the follow-up conversation earns its keep: "worse with activity" covers both a knee that aches on stairs and a shoulder that dislocates.
Blood pressure and heart medication in particular.
You aren't assessing the medication. You're finding out that a condition exists which may affect heart rate response, blood pressure or how they feel partway through a session.
The open question, and the most useful one on the form.
People disclose things here that the specific questions never reach — a pregnancy, a recent operation, a condition they don't think of as relevant. Never treat this as the throwaway at the bottom.
The PAR-Q+ also has follow-up pages: if somebody answers yes to anything in the core set, they work through more detailed questions about the specific condition, which can often clear them to begin without a physician visit. Trainers routinely miss those pages, treat any yes as a full stop, and send people to a doctor unnecessarily.
Decide this before your first client rather than during. The reason trainers get this wrong isn't ignorance — it's that the decision arrives at an awkward moment, with a paid session booked and somebody keen to start.
A workable default:
Work through the follow-up questions first. Many yeses resolve there. Skipping them is why so many people get referred to a GP who then wonders why they're in the room.
If it doesn't resolve, ask for written clearance before training. Not a phone call, not the client's summary of what their doctor said. A short letter naming what was flagged and asking whether there's anything you should avoid.
Say it as a normal part of the process, not a problem. How you deliver it determines whether the client hears "this is routine" or "there's something wrong with me". The words matter more than the policy.
Write down what you did. If you trained somebody after a yes, the reasoning should exist somewhere other than your memory.
Getting clearance costs a week of delay. Not getting it costs considerably more, and the client who gets hurt is the one who told you about it on the form you didn't act on.
There's rarely a law naming the PAR-Q specifically. What there is:
Insurance. Most liability policies for trainers expect documented pre-exercise screening. Read yours — some name a standard, some just require "appropriate screening", and a claim is a bad time to discover which.
Certifying bodies. Most require screening as a condition of certification, and some specify the instrument.
Facilities. If you work in a gym you don't own, they may mandate their own form. Using theirs and yours is not duplication — theirs protects them.
Longer than people expect, and longer than most trainers do. The form is the record of a decision you made about somebody's health, so its value is entirely in still existing years later.
Retention periods vary by jurisdiction and by whether you're treated as a health provider. What's consistent is that "in my email" and "a photo on my phone" are not answers. Whatever you choose, it has to survive a lost phone and a change of gym.
A clipboard works and never runs out of battery. The cost is transcription, storage, and finding it again in two years.
Filled in on a tablet, the client completes it themselves, signs on screen, and the record is done the moment they finish. The real difference isn't speed — it's that the record gets kept at all, rather than living in a drawer somebody eventually clears out.
Either way, the form is what matters. What you fill it in on is a preference.