Sport Health Care Providers Knowledge of Pain-Relieving Medications Including Opioids
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Sport health care providers (SHCP) frequently field inquiries from athletes and key stakeholders regarding pain-relieving procedures, including medications. Purpose: This study sought to investigate the knowledge and role of SHCPs in managing and dispensing pain-relieving medications (PRMs), including opioids, for Canadian athletes. Method: Certified athletic therapists, registered sport massage therapists, licensed doctor of chiropractic sport sciences, and registered physiotherapists were sent an online survey. Percentage responses for each question as well Chi-squared analyses to determine potential interactions between questions were calculated. Results: Findings revealed a significant majority of participants (80%) self-reported having a “great deal” or “some” knowledge about PRMs with approximately half (49.4%) feeling confident to address their athletes’ needs. Many participants indicated they lacked adequate information related to opioids. Participants selected “physician” or “pharmacist” when asked about their preferred sources of information on opioids, revealing a reliance on medical professionals for guidance regarding opioid use in sports health care. More than half of the participants did not possess formal professional education on PRMs or opioids, and those who did have formal education expressed dissatisfaction with the adequacy of their education concerning PRMs and opioids. Furthermore, SHCPs who participated in the study expressed a lack of confidence in their knowledge of opioids, hindering their ability to provide comprehensive answers to athletes’ questions about pain management. They stressed that having more knowledge would boost their confidence in addressing athletes inquires about pain relief. Conclusions: This study underscores the urgent need for improved formalized education for SHCPs regarding PRMs and opioids. Although the SHCP indicated having knowledge of PRMs, the knowledge stemmed from sources other than formalized education, calling into question where their sources of knowledge come from. Enhancing their knowledge in these areas is vital for supporting athletes and addressing their pain management needs safely and effectively. Additionally, the study emphasizes the importance of SHCPs staying updated with federal and provincial laws and regulations to ensure they remain within the boundaries of their professional scope of practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».