7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      To play or not to play, that is the question: an interview study with amateur football coaches on perceptions of pain during sports participation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Amateur football coaches play a key role in preventing, assessing and treating pain among their players, as they are often the first point of contact and may be the main source of advice and guidance. The objective of this study was to explore amateur football coaches’ perceptions of pain during sports participation and their approach to pain management. We conducted a qualitative interview study with 20 amateur football coaches from a strategically selected sample of male and female, and junior and senior teams. A semistructured interview guide and conventional qualitative content analysis were used. One overall theme emerged: To play or not to play—coaches navigating difficult terrain with limited resources. The theme included four main categories: How can pain be understood?; Can pain be avoided?; How to manage players with pain?; What resources do we need? Different ways of understanding pain emerged, and coaches described that players have different pain thresholds. Pain was seen as a part of the game that cannot be completely avoided. In general, there was a restrictive attitude regarding pain medication, though actual consumption was not known. Coaches emphasised shared responsibility with players to achieve adequate training loads, a positive communication climate surrounding pain, and a need for education and competence. In conclusion, coaches expressed various interpretations of pain during sports participation and pain management, where they need to take on great responsibility despite limited medical competence. Coaches believed that adequate pain management is important, and their keys to reducing the risk of pain included structured and customised training, a well-balanced training load and recovery, and a positive communication climate in the team. Coaches often decide whether players experiencing pain can participate in team training and match play, emphasising the need for education support and access to medical competence.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

            Content analysis is a widely used qualitative research technique. Rather than being a single method, current applications of content analysis show three distinct approaches: conventional, directed, or summative. All three approaches are used to interpret meaning from the content of text data and, hence, adhere to the naturalistic paradigm. The major differences among the approaches are coding schemes, origins of codes, and threats to trustworthiness. In conventional content analysis, coding categories are derived directly from the text data. With a directed approach, analysis starts with a theory or relevant research findings as guidance for initial codes. A summative content analysis involves counting and comparisons, usually of keywords or content, followed by the interpretation of the underlying context. The authors delineate analytic procedures specific to each approach and techniques addressing trustworthiness with hypothetical examples drawn from the area of end-of-life care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power

              Sample sizes must be ascertained in qualitative studies like in quantitative studies but not by the same means. The prevailing concept for sample size in qualitative studies is "saturation." Saturation is closely tied to a specific methodology, and the term is inconsistently applied. We propose the concept "information power" to guide adequate sample size for qualitative studies. Information power indicates that the more information the sample holds, relevant for the actual study, the lower amount of participants is needed. We suggest that the size of a sample with sufficient information power depends on (a) the aim of the study, (b) sample specificity, (c) use of established theory, (d) quality of dialogue, and (e) analysis strategy. We present a model where these elements of information and their relevant dimensions are related to information power. Application of this model in the planning and during data collection of a qualitative study is discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med
                BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med
                bmjosem
                bmjsem
                BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2055-7647
                2024
                9 July 2024
                : 10
                : 3
                : e001941
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Unit of Physiotherapy , Linköping University , Linköping, Sweden
                Author notes

                Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

                Additional supplemental material is published online only. To view, please visit the journal online ( https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2024-001941).

                None declared.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8670-5666
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1533-6872
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6883-1471
                Article
                bmjsem-2024-001941
                10.1136/bmjsem-2024-001941
                11243123
                39006390
                1d48eae2-cf39-4bd5-9fc3-0ec47163bec6
                Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 23 June 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: Swedish Research Council for Sport Science;
                Award ID: CIF 2021/9
                Funded by: Swedish Research Council;
                Award ID: 2021-02178
                Categories
                Qualitative Research
                1506

                football,qualitative research,prevention,sports & exercise medicine,sports medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article