Пандемия новой коронавирусной инфекции COVID19 затронула многих людей всех возрастов и профессий, в том числе и профессио нальных спортсменов. В связи с возобновлением проведения различных спортивных мероприятий возникла необходимость в создании кри териев допуска спортсмена к тренировочному и соревновательному процессу. В журнале British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) от 8 февраля 2021 г. авторами Niall Elliott, Rhodri Martin, Neil Heron, Jonathan Elliott, Dan Grimstead и Anita Biswas была опубликована инфографика этапов возвращения к спортивной нагрузке после перенесенной коронавирусной инфекции COVID19. Коллективом авторов был сделан адаптиро ванный перевод и представлен в виде краткого сообщения для публикации.Ключевые слова: профессиональный спортсмен, инфекция, спортивный врач, реабилитация Конфликт интересов: авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов.

The objective of the study — to propose a classification for Haglund’s syndrome based on the differentiated treatment outcomes and to conduct a systematic review of articles on this topic.Materials and Methods. The article based on the diagnosis and treatment of 77 patients with Haglund’s syndrome. 68 patients with Haglund’s syndrome underwent surgery (79 operations), 14 of which were endoscopic. In 9 patients conservative treatment techniques were undertaken.Results. As a result of analyzing a variety of cases of Haglund’s syndrome, we proposed clinical and morphological classifications for Haglund’s syndrome that help to choose the optimal treatment tactics. according to its clinical form, Haglund’s deformity may be common, atypical, and “hiding”. A special clinical variation is a cosmetic form. Depending on morphological characteristics, it was proposed to distinguish upper, upper-lateral, “arc type”, total types, and atypical variations. With the upper type of deformity and, rarely, with the upper-lateral one, an endoscopic technique or minimally invasive surgical correction is preferable. For more extensive variants, the only solution should be an open procedure. The outcomes at 11.5±1.2 months after surgery showed significant improvement in patient condition as compared to the preoperative status (p<0.001). On the AOFAS, the scores were 92.2±3.1 after open procedures (86.1±3.5 and 93.2±2.2 for the different types) and 94.7±1.8 after endoscopic operations. However, we cannot speak confidently of the advantage of endoscopic surgery, since adequate resection during the endoscopic operation is possible only in limited cases of the Haglund’s deformity types (upper and upper-lateral). For the same reason, it is impossible to compare the results of minimally invasive surgery with fluoroscopic control with the results of open surgical intervention. according to AOFAS (p<0.001), conservative treatment also improved the status of patients, more specifically from 75.1±4.7 to 80.1±5.7. However these improvements were significantly less compared to surgical treatment (p<0.001). Our results of patient treatment were included in an updated systematic review of twenty-eight studies related to the results of open (681 patients in total) and endoscopic (321 patients in total) treatment of patients with Haglund’s syndrome.Conclusion. Particular attention should be paid to the “hiding” clinical cases which do not manifest signs of tenopathy, but are detrimental to athletic performance. We consider treatment strategy based on clinical and morphological classifications as justified, when the type of operation (open, minimally invasive or endoscopic) was determined by the type of deformity and its localization.

No abstract