Enter your details:
Name:
E-mail:
 
Thank you for subscribing.
Subscribe to our newsletter!


Sara A. Mohamed1, Jean Bilard2, Denis Hauw1

1University of Lausanne, Institute of Sport Sciences, Grissul, Switzerland
2University of Montpellier, Epsylon, France

Qualitative and Hierarchical Analysis of Protective Factors against Illicit Use of Doping Substances in Athletes Calling a National Anti-Doping Phone-Help Service

KVALITATIVNE I HIJERARHIJSKE ANALIZE ZAŠTITNIH FAKTORA PROTIV NEZAKONITE UPOTEBE DOPING SREDSTAVA KOD SPORTISTA KOJI POZIVAJU NACIONALNI ANTI-DOPING „PHONE-HELP” SERVIS

Monten. J. Sports Sci. Med. 2013, 2(2), 21-25

Abstract

Evidence of a sport-specific hierarchy of protective factors against doping would thus be a powerful aid in adapting information and prevention campaigns to target the characteristics of specific athlete groups, and especially those athletes most vulnerable for doping control. The contents of phone calls to a free and anonymous national anti-doping service called ‘ecoute dopage’ were analysed (192 bodybuilders, 124 cyclists and 44 footballers). The results showed that the protective factors that emerged from analysis could be categorised into two groups. The first comprised ‘Health concerns’, ‘Respect for the law’ and ‘Doping controls from the environment’ and the second comprised ‘Doubts about the effectiveness of illicit products, ‘Thinking skills’ and ‘Doubts about doctors’. The ranking of the factors for the cyclists differed from that of the other athletes. The ordering of factors was 1) respect for the law, 2) doping controls from the environment, 3) health concerns 4) doubts about doctors, and 5) doubts about the effectiveness illicit products. The results are analysed in terms of the ranking in each athlete group and the consequences on the athletes’ experience and relationship to doping. Specific prevention campaigns are proposed to limit doping behaviour in general and for each sport.

Keywords

anti-doping, phone-help service, anti-doping campaigns, recreational drugs, performance enhancement drugs, personal factors, environmental factors

Abstract (MNE)

Postojanje određene sportske hijerarhije zaštitnih faktora protiv dopinga na ovaj način će predstavljati veliku pomoć u adaptiranju informacija i preventivnih kampanja kako bi se otkrile karakteristike određenih sportskih grupa, a naročito karakteristike onih sportista koji su najosjetljiviji na doping kontrolu. Sadržaji telefonskih poziva ka besplatnom i anonimnom nacionalnom anti-doping servisu, zvanom ‘ecoute dopage’, analizirani su (192 bodibildera, 124 biciklista i 44 fudbalera). Rezultati su pokazali da se zaštitni faktori, koji su se pojavili iz analiza, mogu svrstati u dvije grupe. Prva sadrži ‘zdravstvene probleme’, ‘poštovanje zakona’ i ‘doping kontrole iz okruženja’ a druga se sastoji iz ‘sumnji u efiksanost nelegalnih proizvoda, ‘sposobnosti razmišljanja’ i ‘sumnji o ljekarima’. Rangiranje faktora kod biciklista se razlikovalo od rangiranja kod ostalih sportista. Redosljed faktora bio je sljedeći: 1) poštovanje zakona, 2) doping kontrole iz okruženja, 3) zdravstveni problem 4) sumnje o ljekarima, i 5) sumnje u efiksanost nelegalnih proizvoda. Rezultati su analizirani prema rangiranju u svakoj sportskoj grupi i posljedicama na sportsko iskustvo kao i na osnovu odnosa prema dopingu. Predlažu se specifične preventivne kampanje kako bi ograničile doping ponašanje uopšte kao i za svaki sport ponaosob.

Keywords (MNE)

anti-doping, phone-help servis, anti-doping kampanje, ljekovi za rekreaciju, ljekovi za poboljšanje performansi, lični faktori, faktori sredine



View full article
(PDF – 194KB)

References

1. MCDUFF DR, BARON D. Substance use in athletics: A sports psychiatry perspective. Clinics in Sports Medicine, 24 (2005) 885. – 2. LOWENSTEIN W, ARVERS P, GOURARIER L, PORCHE AN, COHEN JM, NORMANN F, PREVOT B, CARRIER C, SANCHEZ M. Activités physiques et sportives dans les antécédents des personnes prises en charge pour addictions, Rapport 1999 de l’étude commanditée par le ministère de la Jeunesse et des Sports (Canada). Ann Med Interne, 151, suppl.A (2000) 18. – 3. EBERHARDT A, DZBANSKI P, FABIRKIEWICZ K, IWANSKI A, RONGE P. Frequency of injuries in recreational bodybuilding. Physical Education and Sport, 51 (2007) 40. – 4. MANGHAM C, MCGRATH P, REID G, STEWART M, Ressort psychologique : pertinence dans le contexte de la promotion de la santé : analyse détaillée. Available from: URL: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecssesc/sca/publications/RessortPsychologique/tdm2.htm. – 5. TURBLIN P, GROSCLAUDE P, NAVARRO F, RIVIERE D, GARRIGUES, M. Enquête épidémiologique sur le dopage en milieu scolaire dans la région Midi-Pyrénées. Science & Sports, 10 (1995) 87. – 6. MOORE MJ, WERCH, CEC. Sport and physical activity participation and substance use among adolescents. Journal of adolescent health, 36 (2005) 486. – 7. KUEHN C, MIKULOVIC, J, Jugement de tentation au dopage par des sportifs adultes exposés à l’intéressement à la performance. In: Actes du colloque AFFRAPS (Dunkerque, 2003). – 8. LORENTE FO, GRIFFET J, GRELOT L. Le dopage sportif : prise de substances, jugements et intentions d’agir chez les jeunes. Toxibase, 10 (2003) 11. – 9. DONAHUE EG, MIQUELON P, VALOIS P, GOULET C, BUIST A, VALLERAND RJ. A motivational model of performance-enhancing substance use in elite athletes. Human Kinetics, 28 (2006) 411. – 10. LORENTE FO, Les jeunes face au dopage : perceptions, jugements, intentions et comportements au sein d’un échantillon représentatif de 816 élèves de terminale. M.S. (University of Aix-Marseille II, 2001). – 11. DODGE TL, JACCARD JJ. The effect of High School sports participation on the use of performance-enhancing substances in young adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39 (2006) 367. – 12. URBACH M, FRANQUES-RENERIC P, AURIACOMBE M. Usage de substances psychoactives et dopage chez les adolescents sportifs et non sportifs. Facteurs de vulnérabilité et données épidémiologiques. Toxibase, 10 (2003) 5. – 13. MICHEL G, PURPER-OUAKIL D, LEHEUZEY MF, MOUREN-SIMEONI MC. Pratiques sportives et corrélats psychopathologiques chez l’enfant et l’adolescent. Neuropsychiatrie de l’enfance et de l’adolescence, 51 (2003) 179. – 14. BOOS C, WULFF P. Medicament abuse by leisure sportsmen and women in the field of physical fitness in Germany. Internationales Expertengespräch Doping-Prävention, Heidelberg, 13 (2005). – 15. BILARD J, NINOT G, HAUW D. Motives for illicit use of doping substances among athletes calling a national anti-doping phone-help service: An exploratory study. Substance Use and Misuse, 46 (2011) 359. – 16. GOLDBERG L, ELLIOT DL, CLARKE GN, MACKINNON DP, MOE EL, ZOREF L, GREEN C, WOLF SL, GREFFRATH E, MILLER DJ, LAPIN A. Effects of a multi-dimensional anabolic steroid prevention intervention. The Adolescents Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids ATLAS Program. Journal of American Medical Association, 276 (1996) 1555. – 17. KINDLUNDH ALS, ISACSON DG, BERGLUND L, NYBERG F. Factors associated with adolescent use of doping agents: anabolic-androgenic steroids. Addiction, 94 (1999) 543. – 18. RODEK J, SEKULIC D, PASALIC, E. Can we consider religiousness as a protective factor against doping behaviour in sport? Journal of Religion and Health, 48 (2009) 445. – 19. STORCH EA, STORCH JB, KOVACS AH, OKUN A, WELSH E. Intrinsic religiosity and substance use in intercollegiate athletes. Journal of Sports & Exercice Psychology, 25 (2003) 248. – 20. LÊ-GERMAIN E, LECA R. Les conduites dopantes fondatrices d’une sous-culture cycliste (1965-1999). STAPS, 70 (2005), 109. – 21. STRIEGEL H, SIMON P, FRISCH S, ROECKER K, DIETZ K, DICKUTH H, ULRICH R. Anabolic ergogenic substance users in fitness-sports: A distinct group supported by the health care system. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 81 (2006) 11. – 22. DONOVAN RJ, EGGER G, KAPERNICK V, MENDOZA J. A conceptual framework for achieving performance enhancing drug compliance in sport. Sports Medecine, 32 (2002) 269. – 23. STEWART B, SMITH A. Drug Use in Sport: Implications for public policy. Journal of Sport and Social issues, 32 (2008) 278. – 24. BRISSONNEAU C, AUBEL O, OHL F, L’épreuve du dopage : Sociologie du cyclisme professionnel (PUF, Paris, 2008). – 25. HAUW D, BILARD J. Situated activity analysis of elite track and field athletes’ use of prohibited performance-enhancing substances. The Journal of Substance Use, 7 (2012) 183. – 26. PETROCZI A, AIDMAN E, NEPUSZ T. Capturing doping attitudes by self-report declarations and implicit assessment: a methodology study. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 3 (2008) 1. – 27. WADDINGTON I, MALCOLM D, RODERICK M, NAIK R. Drug use in English professional football. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 39 (2005) 18. – 28. BLOODWORTH A, MACNAMEE M. Clean Olympians? Doping and anti-doping : the views of talented young british athletes. International Journal of Drug Policies, 21 (2010) 276. – 29. LAURE P, Le dopage. (PUF, Paris, 1995). - 30. SIMON S. Et la prévention ? Toxibase, 3 (2001) 9. – 30. KANAYAMA G, POPE HG, COHANE G, HUDSON JI. Risks factors for anabolic-androgenic steroid use among weightlifters : a case-control study. Drug and Alcohol Dependance, 71 (2003) 77. – 31. SEZNEC JC. Toxicomanie et cyclisme professionnel. Ann Med Psychol, 160 (2002) 72.