Skip to main content
BrainCited

Clinical and laboratory evaluation of upper respiratory symptoms in elite athletes.

Amanda J Cox, Maree Gleeson, David B Pyne, Robin Callister, Will G Hopkins et al.
Other Clinical journal of sport medicine : official journal of the Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine 2008 148 citations
PubMed DOI
<\/script>\n
`; }, get iframeSnippet() { const domain = 'braincited.com'; const params = 'pmid\u003D18806552'; return ``; }, get activeSnippet() { return this.method === 'script' ? this.scriptSnippet : this.iframeSnippet; }, copySnippet() { navigator.clipboard.writeText(this.activeSnippet).then(() => { this.copied = true; setTimeout(() => { this.copied = false; }, 2000); }); } }" @keydown.escape.window="open = false" @click.outside="open = false">

Embed This Widget

Style



      
      
    

Widget powered by . Free, no account required.

Study Design

Study Type
Cohort Study
Population
Sports medicine clinic
Intervention
Clinical and laboratory evaluation of upper respiratory symptoms in elite athletes. None
Comparator
None
Primary Outcome
Clinical and laboratory evaluation of upper respiratory symptoms in elite athlet
Effect Direction
Neutral
Risk of Bias
Unclear

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the etiology of upper respiratory symptoms in elite athletes presenting to a sports physician for treatment. DESIGN: Prospective clinical and laboratory investigations. SETTING: Sports medicine clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy elite-level athletes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Physician-recorded symptoms and diagnosis; health/training questionnaires; laboratory investigations of respiratory pathogens, white blood cell differential counts, and immune parameters. RESULTS: Physicians characterized 89% of presentations as viral or bacterial upper respiratory tract infection. Only 57% of presentations were associated with an identified pathogen or other laboratory parameters indicative of infection. Demographic information, previous illness, and training history did not distinguish between presentations with or without objective measures of infection. Elevated white blood cell and neutrophil counts and lower vitamin D concentrations partially distinguished infectious episodes. The number of systemic symptoms/behaviors at presentation (cough, headache, earache, fatigue, fever/rigors, myalgia/arthralgia, or cessation of training before clinic attendance) had some predictive value for infection: odds ratio per symptom, 1.23 (90% confidence interval: 0.91 to 1.66); probability of infection, 48% with no symptoms to 77% with 6 symptoms. Laboratory investigation identified allergy in a considerable proportion of the cohort (39%). CONCLUSIONS: The discrepancy between physician and laboratory diagnosed infection in elite athletes highlights the need for consideration of alternate diagnostic options when evaluating upper respiratory symptoms in athletes. A considerable proportion of episodes of respiratory symptoms in athletes were not associated with identification of a respiratory pathogen; other potentially treatable causes of upper respiratory symptoms should be considered, particularly in athletes with recurrent symptoms.

TL;DR

The discrepancy between physician and laboratory diagnosed infection in elite athletes highlights the need for consideration of alternate diagnostic options when evaluating upper respiratory symptoms in athletes.

Used In Evidence Reviews

Similar Papers