45 Blender Statistics

by

These blender figures cover the measurement periods and populations identified in the available source material. Estimates, surveys and forecasts retain their reported scope.

Key Blender Statistics

The main findings are:

  • More than 90% of surveyed households reported owning at least one personal or full-size blender (AHAM research summarized 2019; surveyed households, United States (population definition reported by AHAM)).
  • Ice-crushing capability was found on 50% of full-size blenders (AHAM research summarized 2019).
  • Nearly 90% of users of both full-size and personal blenders cleaned the jar after every use (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size and personal blender users).
  • The pediatric enteral-feeding cohort included 70 children aged 1–18 years (2017–2018 recruitment; 2017 diet classification; Boston Children’s Hospital enteral-feeding clinics).
  • Blended-feed trials averaged 6.2 months in the commercial-blend group (study observation; commercial-blend pediatric short-gut subgroup).
  • In healthy volunteers, the mixed-fruit nutrient-extracted drink had a glycemic index of 32.7 ± 8.5 versus 66.2 ± 8.2 for whole mixed fruit (crossover trial; healthy student volunteers aged 20–24).
  • Full-size blenders were used an average of 6.3 times per month (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size blender users).
  • Ice-crushing capability was found on 45% of personal blenders (AHAM research summarized 2019).
  • Another 5% of blender users cleaned the jar frequently rather than after every use (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size and personal blender users).
  • Forty-two of the 70 children received blenderized diets (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort).
  • Blended-feed trials averaged 28 months in the home-blend group (study observation; home-blend pediatric short-gut subgroup).
  • Each fruit test meal contained 25 g of total sugar (crossover trial; mixed-fruit and mango test meals).
  • Full-size blender use averaged 4.4 times per month in the comparable 2009 measure (full-size blender users).
  • Among 42 blenderized-diet participants, 17 (40%) used table foods with a conventional formula base (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort).
  • Seventeen of 21 children receiving blenderized feeds as their sole enteral source discontinued or adjusted the blend (study observation; pediatric short-gut subgroup).

Contents

Blender ownership and household use statistics

  • More than 90% of surveyed households reported owning at least one personal or full-size blender (AHAM research summarized 2019; surveyed households, United States (population definition reported by AHAM)). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Full-size blenders were used an average of 6.3 times per month (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Full-size blender use averaged 4.4 times per month in the comparable 2009 measure (full-size blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Personal blenders were used an average of 8.7 times per month (AHAM research summarized 2019; personal blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Among personal-blender users who said they were using the appliance more, 33% cited eating healthier as the top reason (AHAM research summarized 2019; personal blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Among full-size-blender users who said they were using the appliance more, 31% cited drinking more smoothies (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • More than 25% of blender users reported making smoothies at least five times per month (AHAM research summarized 2019). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)

AHAM blog does not state the survey sample or weighting details on the page.

Self-reported average; sample details are not provided on the page.

Historical comparison from AHAM; survey design is not detailed on the page.

Conditional subgroup statistic, not all blender owners.

Self-reported frequency and rounded threshold.

Blender frequency, recipes and appliance features

Feature presence, not measured ice-crushing performance.

Blender cleaning and everyday kitchen practices

  • Nearly 90% of users of both full-size and personal blenders cleaned the jar after every use (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size and personal blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)
  • Another 5% of blender users cleaned the jar frequently rather than after every use (AHAM research summarized 2019; full-size and personal blender users). (Facts about blenders, a kitchen…)

Rounded self-reported behavior.

Self-reported frequency; frequently is not numerically defined.

Blenderized tube-feeding adoption and nutrition data

  • The pediatric enteral-feeding cohort included 70 children aged 1–18 years (2017–2018 recruitment; 2017 diet classification; Boston Children’s Hospital enteral-feeding clinics). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Forty-two of the 70 children received blenderized diets (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Among 42 blenderized-diet participants, 17 (40%) used table foods with a conventional formula base (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Fourteen of 42 blenderized-diet participants (33%) used commercially prepared blenderized diets (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Eleven of 42 blenderized-diet participants (26%) used homemade blenderized diets (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • The mean duration of blenderized feeds was 19.4 ± 15.8 months among 32 participants with documented start dates (2017–2018; Boston Children’s Hospital blenderized-feed subgroup). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Fiber intake was 14.6 ± 7.3 g/day on blenderized diets versus 4.6 ± 5.1 g/day on conventional formula (2017; children with available diet histories). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Vitamin D intake was 64 ± 42% of dietary reference intake on blenderized diets versus 96 ± 57% on formula (2017; children with available diet histories). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • A sample homemade blenderized batch in the pediatric report provided 1,060 kcal in 950 mL (reported sample recipe; sample homemade blend recipe). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • A systematic review screened 4,442 studies and included eight adult studies totaling 763 patients (literature through review search; adult enteral-feeding evidence base). (The effect of blended tube…)
  • Blended-feed energy concentrations ranged from 1.7 to 7.1 kJ/mL in the adult review (included adult studies; blended tube-feeding groups). (The effect of blended tube…)
  • Blended-feed protein concentrations ranged from 21 to 68.5 g/L in the adult review (included adult studies; blended tube-feeding groups). (The effect of blended tube…)

Single-center prospective observational cohort; not general-population blender ownership.

Clinical cohort with enteral-feeding support.

Subgroup composition, not an adoption rate in all children.

Subgroup composition, not a market share.

Subgroup composition, not a population prevalence.

Only participants with documented start dates; observational duration.

Group comparison is observational; P<0.001 reported.

P=0.01; dietary intake estimate, not serum vitamin D.

Recipe example, not the average diet of participants.

Evidence-base count, not a prevalence estimate.

Range across heterogeneous formulations and studies.

Blenderized diets: clinical outcomes and resource use

  • Blended-feed trials averaged 6.2 months in the commercial-blend group (study observation; commercial-blend pediatric short-gut subgroup). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • Blended-feed trials averaged 28 months in the home-blend group (study observation; home-blend pediatric short-gut subgroup). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • Seventeen of 21 children receiving blenderized feeds as their sole enteral source discontinued or adjusted the blend (study observation; pediatric short-gut subgroup). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • Sixteen of 34 children on a hybrid blend/formula regimen initially required discontinuation or adjustment (study observation; pediatric short-gut hybrid-regimen subgroup). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • Mean remaining small-bowel length was 73.6 ± 52.1 cm among children who tolerated blends and 74.3 ± 60.3 cm among those who discontinued for intolerance (study cohort; pediatric short-gut syndrome cohort). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • Discontinuation occurred in 68% with partial colon resection, 83% with near-total resection and 46% with an intact colon (study cohort; pediatric short-gut syndrome cohort by colon anatomy). (Blenderized Enteral Nutrition in Pediatric…)
  • In the pediatric enteral cohort, adjusted total ER visits were 0.8 ± 1.5 per year on blenderized diets versus 1.4 ± 2.7 on formula (2017 one-year observation; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Adjusted total admissions were 0.8 ± 1.2 per year on blenderized diets versus 1.7 ± 2.3 on formula (2017 one-year observation; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • Adjusted respiratory admissions were 0.2 ± 0.5 per year on blenderized diets versus 0.6 ± 0.8 on formula (2017 one-year observation; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • The one-year pediatric comparison recorded 79 hospitalizations: 48 in the formula group and 31 in the blend group (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • The same comparison recorded 71 emergency visits: 40 in the formula group and 31 in the blend group (2017; Boston Children’s Hospital cohort). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • In a paired subgroup of 22 children, mean total admissions fell from 1.5 ± 1.7 before blending to 0.7 ± 1.0 after blending (one year before versus one year after blend initiation; paired pediatric subgroup). (Health Outcomes and Quality of…)
  • The YourTube cohort enrolled 180 children and families; 134 (74%) supplied 12-month follow-up and 105 (58%) supplied 18-month follow-up (2019–2023 follow-up; 31 NHS sites, United Kingdom). (Safety, resource use and nutritional…)
  • Gastrostomy feeding prevalence was estimated at 84 per 100,000 children or more than 10,000 children in England (source estimate cited in study). (Safety, resource use and nutritional…)

Retrospective clinical cohort.

Retrospective clinical cohort; groups may differ in treatment selection.

Retrospective subgroup; discontinuation included adjustment and was symptom-driven.

Retrospective subgroup; the study reported a significant difference versus blend-only initiation (p=0.017).

No significant difference was reported; anatomy is not a blender-performance measure.

Trend was not statistically significant (p=0.3); small retrospective subgroups.

Adjusted observational comparison; P=0.05 and residual confounding is possible.

Adjusted observational comparison; P=0.01.

Adjusted observational comparison; P=0.04.

Counts from a nonrandomized clinical cohort.

Small before-after subgroup; P=0.05 and no randomized control.

Prospective observational cohort; follow-up was affected by the COVID-19 research pause.

Background prevalence estimate cited by the study, not measured by YourTube.

Blender preparation and measured glucose outcomes

Small laboratory crossover study; result applies to the tested recipe and participants, not all smoothies.

Controlled test-meal formulation, not typical household smoothie composition.

Protocol parameters, not a general blender standard.

Controlled clinical trial of specific formulas; not evidence for ordinary smoothies or general blender users.

Formula-specific result; abstract reports significance but not the AUC point estimates.

Formula-specific result; abstract reports significance but not point estimates.

Table of contents