Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:30:22.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A legal perspective on athlete screening and disqualification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2017

Timothy E. Paterick ,
Zachary R. Paterick ,
Nachiket Patel ,
Khawaja A. Ammar ,
Krishnaswamy Chandrasekaran  and
Abdul J. Tajik
Timothy E. Paterick*
Affiliation:
Methodist Hospital and Methodist Cardiovascular Consultants, Dallas, TX
Nachiket Patel
Affiliation:
Jersey Shore University Medical Center and Monmouth Medical Center Southern Campus, Neptune City, NJ
Khawaja A. Ammar
Affiliation:
Aurora St. Lukes Medical Center, Aurora, WI
Krishnaswamy Chandrasekaran
Affiliation:
Division of Cardiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
Abdul J. Tajik
Affiliation:
Aurora St. Lukes Medical Center, Aurora, WI
*
Correspondence to: T. E. Paterick, MD, 3430 West Wheatland Road, PO Box 1, Suite 202, Dallas, TX 75237, United States of America. Tel: 972 283 1800; Fax: 972 283 1801; E-mail: tpaterick@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Physicians participate in the screening, routine medical supervision, and disqualification of student-athletes. In doing so, they should understand that eligibility/disqualification decisions inevitably have associated liability issues. It is the responsibility of physicians to take the lead role in the student-athlete medical assessment process to allow for optimum safety in sports programmes. The first duty of the physician is to protect the health and well-being of the student-athlete. However, because there is potential liability associated with the screening/disqualification process, physicians are wise to develop sound and reasonable strategies that are in strict compliance with the standard of care. This article focusses on cardiac screening and disqualification for participation in sports.

Keywords

Negligencedutyfiduciary responsibilitysystematic medical and legal approachdue diligence
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 27 , Supplement S1: Sudden Cardiac Arrest in the Young: A Contemporary Perspective , January 2017 , pp. S104 - S109
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Paterick, TE, Paterick, TJ, Fletcher, GF, Maron, BJ. Medical and legal issues in the cardiovascular evaluation of competitive athletes. JAMA 2005; 294: 3011–3018.Google Scholar
2. Maron, BJ, Thompson, PD, Ackerman, MJ, et al. Recommendations and considerations related to preparticipation screening for cardiovascular abnormalities in competitive athletes: 2007 update: scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism: endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Circulation 2007; 115: 1643–1655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Harmon, KG, Asif, IM, Klossner, D, Drezner, JA. Incidence of sudden cardiac death in National Collegiate Athletic Association athletes. Circulation 2011; 123: 1594–1600.Google Scholar
4. Maron, BJ, Thompson, PD, Puffer, JC. Cardiovascular preparticipation screening of competitive athletes: a statement for health professionals from the sudden death committee (clinical cardiology) and Congenital Cardiac Defects Committee (cardiovascular disease in the young). American Heart Association. Circulation 1996; 94: 850–856.Google Scholar
5. Maron, BJ, Zipes, DP. 36th Bethesda Conference: eligibility recommendations for competitive athletes with cardiovascular abnormalities. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45 (theme issue): 1312–1375.Google Scholar
6. Madare v Oschner Foundation Hospital, 505 So 2d 146 (La Ct App 1987).Google Scholar
7. Canterbury v Spence, 464 F2d (CADC 1972).Google Scholar
8. Cowman v Hornaday, 329 NW 2d 422 (Iowa 1983).Google Scholar
9. Stansfield, MP. Malpractice: toward a viable decision for informed consent. Okla L Rev 1979; 32: 868–890.Google Scholar
10. Moore v Regents of the University of California, 51 Cal3d D20 165 793, P2d 479 291 Cal Rptr 147 note 41 (1990).Google Scholar
11. Mitten, MJ, Maron, BJ, Zipes, DP. Task Force 12: legal aspects of the 36tn Bethesda Conference recommendations. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45: 1373–1375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Jones, CJ. Athletics: injury or illness and the decision to return to play. Buff L Rev 1992; 113: 114–116.Google Scholar
13. Mitten, MJ. Team physicians and competitive athletes: allocating legal responsibility for athletic injuries. Univ Pitt L Rev 1993; 55: 129–169.Google Scholar
14. Maron, BJ, Mitten, MJ, Quandt, EF, Zipes, DP. Competitive athletes with cardiovascular disease: the case of Nicholas Knapp. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 1632–1635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Ramirez v Muroc Joint United School District et al. No 252948SPC (Kern County Super Ct May 14, 2004).Google Scholar
16. Izidor v Knight, 2003 WL 21 21689978 (Wash App).Google Scholar
17. Knapp v Northwestern University, 101 F3d 473 (7th Cir 1996).Google Scholar
18. Gardner v Holifield, 639 So2d 652 (1st Cir 1993).Google Scholar
19. Harris-Lewis v Mudge, 803 NE2d 735 (Mass App Ct 2004).Google Scholar
20. Lillard v State of Oregon, No BC 2941 (LA Sup Ct January 19, 1993).Google Scholar
21. Ivey v Providence Hospital, Civil Action No 93-101-330 (DC Sup Ct September 10, 1993).Google Scholar
22. Larkin v Archdiocese of Cincinnati, No C-90–619 (SD Ohio August 31, 1990).Google Scholar
23. Gathers v Loyola-Marymount, No C795027 (LA Sup Ct April 20, 1990).Google Scholar
24. Penny v Sands, No H89–280 (Conn Super Ct May 3, 1989).Google Scholar
25. Kleinknecht v Gettysburg College, 989 F.2d 1360 (3d Cir. 1993).Google Scholar
26. Davidson v Univ of NC at Chapel Hill, 543 S.E. 2d 920 142 (NC App. 2001).Google Scholar
27. Kennedy v Syracuse University, No 94-CV-269, 1995 WL 548710 (N.D.N.Y. September 12, 1995).Google Scholar
28. Settlement at Loyola. New York Times. March 31, 1992, B13.Google Scholar