Journal of athletic training · 2026
Emergency Action Plan Adoption Across Athletic Training Practice Settings.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Scarneo-Miller Samantha E, Stearns Rebecca L, Eason Christianne M, Pike Lacy Alicia M, Lopez Rebecca M, Winkelmann Zachary K, Hirschhorn Rebecca M, Yeargin Susan W
Аннотация
CONTEXT: The 2024 National Athletic Trainers' Association position statement provides updated recommendations for emergency action plan (EAP) adoption. Past research on the 2002 statement showed limited adoption by athletic trainers (ATs). Assessing current adoption across practice settings offers a clearer picture of the EAP implementation landscape.
OBJECTIVE: To examine ATs' adoption of new EAP best practice recommendations across practice settings.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Online questionnaire.
PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Clinically active ATs (N = 614) working in any practice setting (youth, secondary school, Division I Power 4, collegiate athletics; not Power 4, nonmajor professional sports, professional sports, nonsideline).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of an EAP, adoption of recommendations, and emergency equipment across practice settings. Median values are reported for aggregate data.
RESULTS: Most ATs (n = 582, 94.8%) reported having an EAP with the highest adoption among ATs practicing in the secondary school setting (n = 369, 97.6%) and the lowest adoption among those working in nonsideline settings (n = 27, 84.4%). On average, ATs adopted 16 ± 7.5 (median = 18) out of 26 recommendations with the lowest level of adoption among ATs working in youth sports (9.5 ± 7.9, median = 7) and the highest level of adoption among those working in professional sports (18 ± 9, median = 22). Bleeding control materials (n = 483, 78.7%; range, 73.6%-94.7%) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation masks (n = 476, 77.5%; range, 67.8%-94.7%) were the most prevalent emergency equipment available. Bronchodilators (n = 108, 17.6%; range, 3.8%-47.4%) and supplemental oxygen (n = 124, 20.2%; range, 3.8%-73.7%) were the least prevalent available equipment.
CONCLUSIONS: Most ATs reported having an EAP, but fewer than 15% adopted all 2024 recommendations. These findings provide a baseline to assess setting-specific adoption and guide resource development. Emergency equipment availability varied, highlighting the need for ATs to ensure access to setting-specific emergency tools.
OBJECTIVE: To examine ATs' adoption of new EAP best practice recommendations across practice settings.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Online questionnaire.
PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Clinically active ATs (N = 614) working in any practice setting (youth, secondary school, Division I Power 4, collegiate athletics; not Power 4, nonmajor professional sports, professional sports, nonsideline).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of an EAP, adoption of recommendations, and emergency equipment across practice settings. Median values are reported for aggregate data.
RESULTS: Most ATs (n = 582, 94.8%) reported having an EAP with the highest adoption among ATs practicing in the secondary school setting (n = 369, 97.6%) and the lowest adoption among those working in nonsideline settings (n = 27, 84.4%). On average, ATs adopted 16 ± 7.5 (median = 18) out of 26 recommendations with the lowest level of adoption among ATs working in youth sports (9.5 ± 7.9, median = 7) and the highest level of adoption among those working in professional sports (18 ± 9, median = 22). Bleeding control materials (n = 483, 78.7%; range, 73.6%-94.7%) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation masks (n = 476, 77.5%; range, 67.8%-94.7%) were the most prevalent emergency equipment available. Bronchodilators (n = 108, 17.6%; range, 3.8%-47.4%) and supplemental oxygen (n = 124, 20.2%; range, 3.8%-73.7%) were the least prevalent available equipment.
CONCLUSIONS: Most ATs reported having an EAP, but fewer than 15% adopted all 2024 recommendations. These findings provide a baseline to assess setting-specific adoption and guide resource development. Emergency equipment availability varied, highlighting the need for ATs to ensure access to setting-specific emergency tools.