Recurring concern

Insufficient access to cardiac screening for young athletes

First to latest report 7 Apr 2025 — 16 Apr 2026

Reports that mention this concern
2
Times this concern has been raised
2
Stated actions linked to this concern
3

What this concern includes

Includes failures of arrangements that provide, fund or make clinically appropriate cardiac screening available to young athletes and competitive sports participants, including boxers, football players and comparable groups where screening is intended to identify cardiac conditions relevant to participation.

What is not included
  • Excludes general health screening, cardiac treatment or emergency response where access to preventive cardiac screening for young athletes is not the unsafe condition.
  • Excludes public awareness or education about sudden cardiac death and red-flag symptoms unless the assertion also identifies deficient access to cardiac screening.
  • Excludes screening for non-cardiac conditions or screening of people outside a young-athlete or competitive-sports context.
  • Excludes the substantive clinical quality of a cardiac screening examination after screening has been made available.

Reports and published responses 2 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. West London

    AI-generated summary

    Adam Ankers · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Adam Ankers suffered a cardiac arrest while playing grassroots football on 31 January 2024 due to a previously unidentified inherited cardiac condition, and died in hospital on 4 February 2024 following brain stem death. Agonal breathing and cardiac arrest were not recognised at the pitch or by the 999 call handler, and an AED was brought to the pitch but not used. The report identified concerns about recognition of agonal breathing and cardiac arrest, access to and use of defibrillators, dissemination of sudden cardiac arrest training, cardiac screening, and cascade communication of inherited disease information.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unavailability of cardiac screening for all young people and football players aged 14 and upwards

    Wider context from the report

    “POINT D: That cardiac screening in those aged 14 and upwards reduces the risk of sudden cardiac death and this is not available to all young people or your football players ”

    Source location

    Adam Ankers · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Continue campaigning for awareness of young sudden cardiac death, heart testing access, and further prevention research.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “CRY will continue to campaign to raise awareness of young sudden cardiac death, the devastating impact it has on families, and the need for every young person to have the opportunity to have their heart tested, as well as the importance of further research into the causes and prevention of young sudden cardiac death.”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiac Risk in the Young
    Page 8 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide cardiac screening to more than 35,000 young people annually.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The ECG is the most effective tool available for the early identification of many cardiac conditions associated with young sudden cardiac death. Once a condition is identified, appropriate advice, treatment and clinical management can be provided to significantly reduce the risk of cardiac arrest. CRY currently screens more than 35,000 young people each year and one in every 300 young people screened will be identified with a potentially life-threatening cardiac condition. Demand for screening continues to exceed CRY's current capacity to provide it. To help address this challenge, CRY is investing in machine learning and AI to make screening more cost-effective, address the shortage of specialist ECG interpreters, and help meet current and future demand.”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiac Risk in the Young
    Page 8 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Invest in machine learning and artificial intelligence to make screening more cost-effective, address specialist ECG interpreter shortages, and increase capacity.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The ECG is the most effective tool available for the early identification of many cardiac conditions associated with young sudden cardiac death. Once a condition is identified, appropriate advice, treatment and clinical management can be provided to significantly reduce the risk of cardiac arrest. CRY currently screens more than 35,000 young people each year and one in every 300 young people screened will be identified with a potentially life-threatening cardiac condition. Demand for screening continues to exceed CRY's current capacity to provide it. To help address this challenge, CRY is investing in machine learning and AI to make screening more cost-effective, address the shortage of specialist ECG interpreters, and help meet current and future demand.”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiac Risk in the Young
    Page 8 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The National Screening Committee decides cardiac screening policy, with no UK consensus and review scheduled for 2026/27.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “There has been no clear UK consensus on the benefits of screening of young people for participation in sport.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England 2
    Page 7 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Decisions on screening young people for sports participation are made by the National Screening Committee.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This topic is governed/decided by the National Screening Committee (NSC) and was last considered in 2019, at which point there was no UK consensus. It is due to be reviewed in 2026/27.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 7 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Population screening for sudden cardiac death should not currently be offered because tests are insufficiently accurate and may cause harm.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The UK NSC last reviewed screening for the conditions associated with sudden cardiac death in people under the age of 39 years old in 2019. The conclusion of that review was that population screening should not be offered, as research showed that current tests are not accurate enough to use on young people with no symptoms.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Population-level cardiac screening policy falls outside RCUK’s remit, so RCUK does not produce guidance or training in this area.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In relation to Point D, concerning cardiac screening in young people, RCUK acknowledges the importance of this issue. However, cardiac screening programmes and population-level screening policy fall outside the remit of RCUK, and we do not produce guidance or training in this area. We consider that this matter is more appropriately addressed by the UK National Screening Committee and relevant specialist organisations in cardiology and genomics.”

    Source location

    Response from Resuscitation Council UK
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Cardiac screening concerns should be addressed by the UK National Screening Committee and relevant specialist cardiology and genomics organisations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In relation to Point D, concerning cardiac screening in young people, RCUK acknowledges the importance of this issue. However, cardiac screening programmes and population-level screening policy fall outside the remit of RCUK, and we do not produce guidance or training in this area. We consider that this matter is more appropriately addressed by the UK National Screening Committee and relevant specialist organisations in cardiology and genomics.”

    Source location

    Response from Resuscitation Council UK
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 April 2026

    Open published response

  2. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

    AI-generated summary

    Christian James Gabriel Hobbs · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Christian James Gabriel Hobbs, a 17-year-old, suffered an acute deterioration at home and was taken to hospital on 26 December 2017, where he developed cardiac arrest and died after treatment was stopped. The inquest recorded multi-organ failure, cardiogenic shock and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. Concerns included the absence of an echocardiogram before his arrest, non-targeted fluid management, delays in obtaining blood gases, team communication, radiology documentation, differential diagnosis, ECG interpretation, record keeping and emergency-department alarm data retention.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of funding mechanisms enabling cardiac screening for competitive boxers

    Wider context from the report

    “POINT Q – TESTING IN COMPETITIVE SPORTS FOR CARDIAC CONDITIONS I have a concern about funding mechanisms being available to say England Boxing that would enable appropriate screening for competitive boxers where there is already a mandatory need for a medical examination under the ‘fit or not fit to box’ protocol. This would aid further research on this important topic. Additionally, there may be a lack of general awareness for parents of sports participants on the issue of sudden cardiac death and so there may be a gap in knowledge/understanding of possible emergence of red flag symptoms. ”

    Source location

    Christian James Gabriel Hobbs · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 22 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Additional departmental funding for cardiac screening cannot be provided.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “With regard to funding, while I would be happy to raise the issue of cardiac screening with England Boxing, the department is not able to provide additional funding. England Boxing, the national governing body for community boxing in England, which is independent of the Government, is responsible for assessing and managing its funding requirements. England Boxing receives some of its income in the form of a grant from Sport England, the Government’s arm’s-length body for grassroots sport, but also receives income through other grants, fees and donations. I believe this gives them the avenues to explore any additional funding needed.”

    Source location

    Response from Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    England Boxing is responsible for assessing and managing funding requirements for additional cardiac screening.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “With regard to funding, while I would be happy to raise the issue of cardiac screening with England Boxing, the department is not able to provide additional funding. England Boxing, the national governing body for community boxing in England, which is independent of the Government, is responsible for assessing and managing its funding requirements. England Boxing receives some of its income in the form of a grant from Sport England, the Government’s arm’s-length body for grassroots sport, but also receives income through other grants, fees and donations. I believe this gives them the avenues to explore any additional funding needed.”

    Source location

    Response from Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2025

    Open published response

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026