Related Experiment Videos
Advancing the preparticipation physical evaluation (PPE): an ACSM and FIMS joint consensus statement.
William O Roberts1, Herbert Löllgen, Gordon O Matheson
11Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Phalen Village Family Medicine Clinic, 1414 Maryland Ave. East, St. Paul, MN; 2Hon.Pres.German Fed.Sports Medicine, Bermesgasse 32b, D-42897 Remscheid; 3Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford School of Medicine, 341 Galvez Street, Stanford, CA; 4Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Department of Economics, 425 University Blvd., Indianapolis, IN; 5Sport Injury Prevention Research Centre, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4; 6Distinguished Professorship in Exercise Sciences in the Department of Internal Medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 7232 Greenville Ave., Suite 435, Dallas, TX; 7University of Illinois at Chicago, Professor of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, 835 South Wolcott, 270 Medical Sciences South, Chicago, Illinois; 8Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, The Goldberg Center for Community Pediatric Health, Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Ave., NW, Washington, DC; 9Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Orthopedic Surgery, Director of Primary Care Sports Medicine, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave. MC 6082, Chicago, IL; 10Institute of Sports Medicine and Science, Largo Gabrielli 1, 00197 Rome (Italy); 11Treasurer of FIMS, Vice President of EFSMA, Kiewitstraat 141, 3500 HASSELT; 12Director of the Austrian Insitute for Sport Medicine, Department of Sports and Physiological Performance, Centre for Sports Science and University Sports, of the University of Vienna, Auf der Schmelz 6, A-1150 Vienna, Austria; and 13President of FIMS, Professor of Internal Medicine and Rector, University of Rome 'Foro Italico,' Piazza Lauro de Bosis, 15, 00135 Roma.
The preparticipation physical evaluation (PPE) lacks standardization, impacting its implementation. Developing a universally accepted PPE, potentially electronic, is crucial for athlete safety and research.
Area of Science:
- Sports Medicine
- Cardiology
- Public Health
Background:
- The preparticipation physical evaluation (PPE) is a widely accepted but non-standardized process.
- Implementation varies due to cost, access, participant factors, and mandates.
- Current screening relies on expert opinion, lacking large-scale outcome data.
Framework:
- Consensus exists on the importance of cardiac risk assessment via history and physical exam.
- Electrocardiogram (ECG) screening is recommended for increased cardiac risk, but not routine for all.
- Areas of agreement can guide standardization efforts by organizations like ACSM and FIMS.
Implementation:
- Costs are typically borne by athletes, families, or clubs.
- Standardization is hindered by diverse factors including cost, access, and varying mandates.
- An electronic PPE (ePPE) offers potential for standardization and data collection.
Implications:
- A universally accepted PPE is needed for consistent athlete health screening.
- An electronic PPE could streamline administration, enable remote data access, and facilitate crucial prospective studies.
- Standardized data collection is vital for advancing research on PPE effectiveness and athlete safety.