Article type
Abstract
Background. Sports physicians require guidance on sports preparticipation evaluations (PPEs) of recreational athletes despite limited evidence on patient-relevant outcomes. Therefore, a consensus-based PPE guideline is currently in development in Germany. This guideline incorporates the views of the target population (consumers rather than patients) via surveys because no patient/consumer organizations were available for recruiting panel members directly. In addition, we used surveys to include the perspective of guideline users (sports physicians).
Objectives. The aim of the surveys was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of a PPE and to collect feedback on draft recommendations.
Methods. Two cross-sectional online surveys were conducted among consumers and sports physicians. Respondents were asked to answer acceptability and feasibility questions and to use free-text fields to comment on 23 draft recommendations. The guideline panel was asked to consider survey responses in their discussions and to modify recommendations where appropriate. Recommendations that were modified following feedback by consumers and/or sports physicians were counted and analyzed using descriptive statistics.
Results. A total of 144 consumers and 204 sports physicians completed the survey. Among consumers, 82% considered a PPE to be acceptable, and only 1% had concerns or reservations. Of 204 sports physicians, 82% would offer or already offer a PPE, and only 2% had concerns or reservations. Perceived feasibility barriers related mainly to reimbursement, limited resources, and qualification issues. Approximately half of the draft recommendations (11/23, 48%) were modified based on stakeholder feedback, and 3 were removed (Table 1). The guideline authors included important feedback from stakeholders relating to the interpretation or implementation of the recommendations in the guideline text.
Conclusions. The surveys showed that a PPE is acceptable and feasible for stakeholders. Surveying the target population and guideline users proved to be a useful tool in developing guidelines.
Relevance and Importance to Patients. This study is of indirect patient/consumer relevance, as it contributes to the methods available to produce more consumer-relevant guidelines and provides evidence in support of consumer involvement via surveys.
Patients were not directly involved in this work.
Ethical approval
The survey received approval from the ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (ref. 23-1369-S2).
Objectives. The aim of the surveys was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of a PPE and to collect feedback on draft recommendations.
Methods. Two cross-sectional online surveys were conducted among consumers and sports physicians. Respondents were asked to answer acceptability and feasibility questions and to use free-text fields to comment on 23 draft recommendations. The guideline panel was asked to consider survey responses in their discussions and to modify recommendations where appropriate. Recommendations that were modified following feedback by consumers and/or sports physicians were counted and analyzed using descriptive statistics.
Results. A total of 144 consumers and 204 sports physicians completed the survey. Among consumers, 82% considered a PPE to be acceptable, and only 1% had concerns or reservations. Of 204 sports physicians, 82% would offer or already offer a PPE, and only 2% had concerns or reservations. Perceived feasibility barriers related mainly to reimbursement, limited resources, and qualification issues. Approximately half of the draft recommendations (11/23, 48%) were modified based on stakeholder feedback, and 3 were removed (Table 1). The guideline authors included important feedback from stakeholders relating to the interpretation or implementation of the recommendations in the guideline text.
Conclusions. The surveys showed that a PPE is acceptable and feasible for stakeholders. Surveying the target population and guideline users proved to be a useful tool in developing guidelines.
Relevance and Importance to Patients. This study is of indirect patient/consumer relevance, as it contributes to the methods available to produce more consumer-relevant guidelines and provides evidence in support of consumer involvement via surveys.
Patients were not directly involved in this work.
Ethical approval
The survey received approval from the ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (ref. 23-1369-S2).