|
17th
Annual ECSS-Congress, Bruges 2012
Abstract details
| Abstract-ID: |
537 |
|
Session: |
[PP-SH01] Misc. topics 1 |
|
Lecture room: |
Aula PS1 |
|
Date & time: |
27.06.2013 / 14:00 - 15:00 |
| Title of the paper: |
ATHLETES´ AND DOPING CONTROL OFFICERS´ ON-SITE EXPERIENCES DURING REAL DOPING CONTROLS |
| Authors: |
Peters, C., Postler, T., Schulz, T., Oberhoffer, R. |
| Institution: |
Technical University of Munich |
| Department: |
Institute of Preventive Pediatrics |
| Country: |
Germany |
|
Abstract text |
Introduction
During doping controls interpersonal contact and communication between athlete and doping control officer (DCO) may influence the control situation, resulting in a neutral and relaxed or displeasing and uncomfortable atmosphere. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to survey German athletes and DCOs concerning their on-site experiences during doping controls.
Methods
In a cross sectional survey 115 DCOs received a DIN A4 envelope containing one sealed DIN A5 envelope for the DCO himself and a second sealed one to be handed to the athlete during the next doping control. In a written short-form questionnaire both groups were asked to judge the behavior of their counterpart independently of each other. Facts, personal observations, subjective impressions and individual perceptions with regard to the currently finished doping control were asked. Participation was voluntarily and anonymously and considered issues of privacy and confidentiality.
Results
43 high elite athletes (response rate 37.4%) and 54 DCOs (response rate 47%) completed the questionnaires (42 matches). Athletes stated more frequently to be prompted for something than DCOs confirmed to have requested: to draw up the jumper (A: 21/39 vs. DCO: 19/49) or to drop the trousers (A: 27/39 vs. DCO: 16/50). Although some DCOs (12/49) prompted to allow a nonrestrictive view of the urine leaving their body just every second athlete (20/39) stated a careful observation during urinating in reality. Altogether athletes confirmed DCOs working professionally (yes: 42/43; 1 no comment) in collecting urine and/or blood samples.
Discussion
Significance of the survey is limited (small samples, self-selection in participation, social desirability of answers, etc.). Nevertheless, it provides an informative basis on different perceptions of athletes and DCOs during the same doping control. Overall, DCOs behavior was confirmed to be professional, which is in agreement with results from a Switzerland survey (Lamprecht et al., 2010). However, while DCOs possibly assumed to have reminded only, athletes took this remembrance as a prompt more frequently. In addition to the detailed briefing of DCOs with regard to sampling procedure educational programs should include recommendations for the interaction with athletes more often.
References
Lamprecht M, Gebert A, Stamm H. (2010) Athletenbefragung 2010: Befragung der Athletinnen und Athleten zu Dopinginformationen und Dopingkontrollen. http://www.antidoping.ch/files/download/de/101011_antidoping_kurzfassung_athletenbefragung_dt.pdf (assessed 3/2012)
|
| Topic: |
Philosophy and Ethics |
| Keyword I: |
doping control |
| Keyword II: |
cross sectional survey |
| Keyword III: |
on-site experience |
|