English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Context Secondary schools (SSs) inconsistently adopt emergency action plans (EAPs) for athletics. Objective To describe the barriers, facilitators, and social determinants influencing EAP adoption in SSs in the United States. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Secondary schools. Patients or Other Participants A national sample of athletic trainers (ATs; n = 9642) and athletic directors (ADs; n = 9687) were invited to participate in a Web-based questionnaire. A total of 1273 (13.2%) ATs and 702 (9.2%) ADs responded to the survey. Main Outcome Measure(s) The questionnaire addressed self-reported barriers to, facilitators of, and social determinants (eg, locale, funding classification [eg, public or private SS]) of EAP adoption. The responses of ATs and ADs were analyzed separately. Barriers, facilitators, and social determinants were evaluated using descriptive statistics. Contingency (2 × 2) tables were used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) of adopting an EAP and the presence of each social determinant. Results Perceived barriers to implementation were a lack of knowledge about how to implement an EAP and financial limitations. Facilitators were having access to health care personnel, state mandates, and support from a person in an authoritative position. Compared with ATs at rural schools, ATs at suburban schools displayed greater odds of having an EAP (χ2 = 5.63, P = .01, OR = 1.63 [95% confidence interval = 1.08, 2.44]). According to the ADs' responses, a larger SS enrollment (≥500) led to greater odds of adopting an EAP (OR = 2.02 [95% confidence interval = 1.41, 2.89]). Conclusions Perceived barriers to EAP adoption suggest that ATs and ADs need to be educated so they can provide additional information on the low cost of EAP adoption. Further, ADs described state mandates as facilitators to improve EAP adoption; therefore, efforts to educate state leaders about the need for mandated policies may be warranted. Certain social determinants (eg, school enrollment) may affect EAP adoption, but not every proposed determinant significantly affected adoption.

Emergency Action Plans in Secondary Schools: Barriers, Facilitators, and Social Determinants Affecting Implementation