Challenges surrounding return-to-play (RTP) for the sports clinician: a case highlighting the need for a thorough three-step RTP model.

Return-to-play (RTP) is a multifactorial process of retuning an injured athlete back to competition when risk for re-injury is minimized. Traditionally, these decisions are made by medical practitioners based on experience or anecdotal evidence. RTP decisions continue to be a challenging task for the medical practitioner. In the interest of advancing sports medicine for the betterment of athletes, improving the RTP decision-making process with a new paradigm has been suggested.1 It stands to clarify the intricacies used by clinicians when making RTP decisions by providing insight into the multiple factors that must be considered; not only by the athlete and medical practitioner, but all relevant parties (i.e., coaches, trainers, and organizations). This case describes a 19-year-old Ontario Junior Hockey League (OJHL) player who fractured his left clavicle during game play and consequently, suffered a more severe injury to the same clavicle 5½ weeks later by returning to competition against medical advice. This case highlights the potential issues that present when a RTP protocol is poorly executed and addresses the need to adopt a thorough decision-based RTP model proposed by Creighton et al.1 Further, the discussion will draw on current literature and issues surrounding RTP, and the potential legal implications associated with premature return to competition. Given the lack of consensus among sport medicine experts in regards to RTP criteria, the presented model stands to provide a pivotal framework upon which future research can be conducted, while improving the current criteria in place when returning an athlete to competition to aid medical practitioners.