*Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Human Performance Laboratory, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California; †Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California; ‡Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and §Sport Injury Prevention Research Centre, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Clin J Sport Med. 2013 Nov;23(6):456-61. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0b013e318295bb17.
To describe the variability in the return-to-play (RTP) decisions of experienced team clinicians and to assess their clinical opinion as to the relevance of 19 factors described in a RTP decision-making model.
Survey questionnaire.
Advanced Team Physician Course.
Sixty-seven of 101 sports medicine clinicians completed the questionnaire.
Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. For categorical variables, we report percentage and frequency. For continuous variables, we report mean (SD) if data were approximately normally distributed and frequencies for clinically relevant categories for skewed data.
The average number of years of clinical sports medicine experience was 13.6 (9.8). Of the 62 clinicians who responded fully, 35% (n = 22) would "clear" (vs "not clear") an athlete to participate in sport even if the risk of an acute reinjury or long-term sequelae is increased. When respondents were given 6 different RTP options rather than binary choices, there were increased discrepancies across some injury risk scenarios. For example, 8.1% to 16.1% of respondents who chose to clear an athlete when presented with binary choices, later chose to "not clear" an athlete when given 6 graded RTP options. The respondents often considered factors of potential importance to athletes as nonimportant to the RTP decision process if risk of reinjury was unaffected (range, n = 4 [10%] to n = 19 [45%]).
There is a high degree of variability in how different clinicians weight the different factors related to RTP decision making. More precise definitions decrease but do not eliminate this variability.
描述经验丰富的团队临床医生在重返赛场(RTP)决策中的可变性,并评估他们对 RTP 决策模型中描述的 19 个因素的临床相关性的看法。
问卷调查。
高级团队医师课程。
101 名运动医学临床医生中有 67 名完成了问卷调查。
使用描述性统计分析结果。对于分类变量,我们报告百分比和频率。对于连续变量,如果数据近似正态分布,则报告平均值(SD);如果数据偏态,则报告临床相关类别的频率。
平均临床运动医学经验为 13.6(9.8)年。在 62 名回答完整的临床医生中,35%(n=22)即使急性再损伤或长期后遗症的风险增加,也会“准许”(vs“不准许”)运动员参加运动。当给受访者提供 6 种不同的 RTP 选择而不是二元选择时,在某些受伤风险场景下,差异会更大。例如,当给出二元选择时,有 8.1%至 16.1%的受访者选择“准许”运动员,而当给出 6 种分级 RTP 选择时,后来选择“不准许”运动员。如果再受伤的风险不受影响(范围为 n=4[10%]至 n=19[45%]),受访者通常认为对运动员有潜在重要性的因素对 RTP 决策过程不重要。
不同临床医生对与 RTP 决策相关的不同因素的重视程度存在很大差异。更精确的定义会减少但不会消除这种差异。