Abstract
Objectives To explore the priorities and directions of athlete upper and lower limb pain assessment by facilitating shared understandings of athletes and sports physiotherapists.
Design Qualitative Research using a hermeneutic phenomenological approach.
Methods We carried out focus groups using a deliberate criterion sample and a constructivist perspective. At the end of each focus group, we used the nominal group technique method to generate a list of consensus-based priorities for future pain assessment. Our paper follows the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines.
Results We completed five focus groups, comprising twelve athletes (female, n=5, male n=7) and four sports physiotherapists (male, n=4) Two final themes (and six subthemes) were developed; (i) Enhanced Communication and Pain Descriptions (describing and representing pain, better communication, the role of technology, providing direction and setting the pace), (ii) Integrating Sport Specific and Multidimensional Assessments (broadening the pain assessment toolkit, the role of technology). We developed a set of thirteen practical priorities for pain assessment that span the subjective, objective, and general aspects of the athlete pain assessment.
Conclusion We have presented stakeholder-generated perspectives, directions, and priorities for athlete pain assessment. Athletes and Physiotherapists must continue to work together to achieve a comprehensive sport-specific multidimensional pain assessment experience alongside their wider support networks to ensure optimal representation and communication. We have highlighted some available pain assessment tools and strategies and outlined how novel tools may address certain gaps in the assessment process. Researchers, clinicians, and athletes can consider the practical guidance we have provided to address these priorities.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by funding from Science Foundation Ireland under the grant for the Insight SFI Research Centre for Data Analytics (SFI/12/RC/2289_P2) Funders had no role in the data collection, analysis or interpretation and will have no role in approving the final manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Permission was granted for this study by the University College Dublin Human Research Ethics Committee. (LS-22-40-Purcell-Caulfield)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The original version was changed significantly following feedback from editors, influencing data analysis and how it is presented in results and discussion. The methods and results content remains the same.
Data Availability
The full published data set can be accessed at
