Pre-participation evaluation of recreational and competitive athletes – A systematic review of guidelines and consensus statements

Author:

Weise Alina1ORCID,Könsgen Nadja1,Joisten Christine2,Schlumberger Fabian1,Hirschmüller Anja3,Breuing Jessica1,Goossen Käthe1

Affiliation:

1. Witten/Herdecke University: Universitat Witten/Herdecke

2. German Sport University Cologne: Deutsche Sporthochschule Koln

3. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg: Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiburg

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Pre-participation evaluation (PPE) aims to support safe participation in sports. The goal of this systematic review was to aggregate evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for the PPE of recreational or competitive athletes as preparation for developing a German guideline on this subject. Methods: Five databases, including MEDLINE, were searched in August 2022. Searches on the websites of relevant guideline organisations and specialty medical associations were also performed, complemented by citation screening. We included guidelines/consensus statements with recommendations for PPE of adult recreational athletes or competitive athletes of any age, both without chronic illness. We extracted and synthesised data in a structured manner and appraised quality using selected domains of the AGREE-II tool. Results: From the 6611 records found, we included 35 documents. Overall, the quality of the included documents was low. Seven documents (20%) made recommendations on the entire PPE process, while the remainder focussed on cardiovascular screening (16/35, 45.7%) or other topics. We extracted 305 recommendations. Of these, 11.8% (36/305) applied to recreational athletes, while the remaining 88.2% (269/305) applied to athletes in organised or competitive sports. A total of 12.8% (39/305) of recommendations were directly linked to evidence from primary studies. Conclusion: Many recommendations exist for PPE, but only a few are evidence based. The lack of primary studies evaluating the effects of screening on health outcomes may have led to this lack of evidence-based guidelines and contributed to poor rigour in guideline development. Future guidelines/consensus statements require a more robust evidence base, and reporting should improve. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022355112

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3