Abstract des Autors

A variety of congenital cardiovascular abnormalities are the principal causes of sudden death in young competitive athletes, and some of these tragedies have been widely publicized. The identification of important cardiovascular abnormalities in highly trained athletes often leads to medical and legal controversy over the decision to disqualify such athletes from competition. The criteria for assessing medical eligibility in such circumstances have been of interest to athletes and their families, their physicians, and representatives of the schools or teams involved, as well as the legal profession. There are no well-established procedures for determining whether amateur athletes with cardiovascular disease are eligible to participate in competitive sports. Organizations such as the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) do not have standards for excluding athletes with heart disease but do permit member institutions to establish physical qualifications and assign responsibility to team physicians for making such medical determinations. Furthermore, in 1994 a consensus panel known as the 26th Bethesda Conference (sponsored by the American College of Cardiology) addressed the medical-eligibility criteria for participation in competitive sports in a systematic, prospective fashion and provided specific, unbiased recommendations with respect to over 70 cardiovascular abnormalities. Because of recent developments in this area of cardiovascular medicine and the law, as reflected in the case of 'Knapp v. Northwestern University', it is timely to discuss the evolving medical and legal framework influencing the approach to evaluating amateur athletes (in high school and college) with medical impairments. Verf.-Referat