Sports medicine - open · 2025
Pre-Participation Evaluation of Recreational and Competitive Athletes - A Systematic Review of Guidelines and Consensus Statements.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Weise Alina, Könsgen Nadja, Joisten Christine, Schlumberger Fabian, Hirschmüller Anja, Breuing Jessica, Gooßen Käthe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: 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, complemented by searches on the websites of relevant guideline organisations and specialty medical associations and citation screening. We included guidelines/consensus statements with recommendations for PPE of adult recreational athletes or competitive athletes of any age, excluding those with certain chronic illnesses. 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 and 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.
METHODS: Five databases, including MEDLINE, were searched in August 2022, complemented by searches on the websites of relevant guideline organisations and specialty medical associations and citation screening. We included guidelines/consensus statements with recommendations for PPE of adult recreational athletes or competitive athletes of any age, excluding those with certain chronic illnesses. 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 and 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.