Daniel Niederer1, Jan Wilke2, Lutz Vogt2, Winfried Banzer2. 1. Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Electronic address: niederer@em.uni-frankfurt.de. 2. Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess how different decision-guiding factors, such as health- and performance-related stakeholders, as well as evidence-based guidelines, support the process-oriented final positive return-to-play (RTP) decision of head coaches responsible for semiprofessional sport teams. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Team sport. PARTICIPANTS: A survey consisting of questions on the importance of different decision-guiding factors used when making the RTP decision after injuries was administered to and completed by head coaches (N=238) of semiprofessional players' teams. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: With respect to helpfulness in the RTP decision-making process, the coaches rated both the importance of the opinions of physicians, physiotherapists, strength and conditioning coaches, and the athletes themselves, and the importance of the general and injury-specific RTP guidelines. RESULTS: Our survey revealed that the head coaches rely on physicians and physiotherapists to a large extent, to the athletes and to themselves to a medium extent, and to strength and conditioning coaches and RTP guidelines to a small but still relevant extent. The coaches' efforts to seek a shared decision-making process in RTP are, hence, partially evident. CONCLUSIONS: A multitude of actuators intervene when making the RTP decision. The professionalization of the RTP process in semiprofessional sports includes the athletes themselves, the head coaches, the (external) physicians, the (external) physiotherapists, and the strength and conditioning coaches based on general RTP decision-making models and specific criteria related to injury type, sports type, level, and playing position. The development of awareness and implementation strategies of RTP models should be subject to further research.
OBJECTIVE: To assess how different decision-guiding factors, such as health- and performance-related stakeholders, as well as evidence-based guidelines, support the process-oriented final positive return-to-play (RTP) decision of head coaches responsible for semiprofessional sport teams. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Team sport. PARTICIPANTS: A survey consisting of questions on the importance of different decision-guiding factors used when making the RTP decision after injuries was administered to and completed by head coaches (N=238) of semiprofessional players' teams. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: With respect to helpfulness in the RTP decision-making process, the coaches rated both the importance of the opinions of physicians, physiotherapists, strength and conditioning coaches, and the athletes themselves, and the importance of the general and injury-specific RTP guidelines. RESULTS: Our survey revealed that the head coaches rely on physicians and physiotherapists to a large extent, to the athletes and to themselves to a medium extent, and to strength and conditioning coaches and RTP guidelines to a small but still relevant extent. The coaches' efforts to seek a shared decision-making process in RTP are, hence, partially evident. CONCLUSIONS: A multitude of actuators intervene when making the RTP decision. The professionalization of the RTP process in semiprofessional sports includes the athletes themselves, the head coaches, the (external) physicians, the (external) physiotherapists, and the strength and conditioning coaches based on general RTP decision-making models and specific criteria related to injury type, sports type, level, and playing position. The development of awareness and implementation strategies of RTP models should be subject to further research.
Authors: May A Risberg; Kathrin Steffen; Agnethe Nilstad; Grethe Myklebust; Eirik Kristianslund; Marie M Moltubakk; Tron Krosshaug Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Daniel Niederer; Matthias Keller; Andrea Achtnich; Ralph Akoto; Atesch Ateschrang; Winfried Banzer; Alexander Barié; Raymond Best; Andree Ellermann; Andreas Fischer; Daniel Guenther; Mirco Herbort; Jürgen Höher; Maren Janko; Tobias M Jung; Matthias Krause; Wolf Petersen; Thomas Stoffels; Amelie Stöhr; Frederic Welsch; Thomas Stein Journal: Trials Date: 2019-08-13 Impact factor: 2.279