scholarly journals PSU36 Evidence Based Medicine: A Case Study of its Application to Innovative Surgical Procedures in the UK

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. A408
Author(s):  
J. Mauskopf ◽  
W. Beach ◽  
L. Mcintyre ◽  
S.K. Bhattacharyya ◽  
L. Higgins ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Reidt ◽  
Keri Hager ◽  
James Beattie ◽  
Amy Pittenger ◽  
Maureen Smith ◽  
...  

This case study describes a longitudinal curricular sequence implemented to teach evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills. The longitudinal sequence is innovative in its approach, design, and assessment of EBM. This approach moves away from the conventional strategy of teaching drug information and drug literature evaluation as stand-alone courses and instead embraces the EBM Framework and its use in the context of authentic problem solving. The EBM Framework—Ask, Acquire, Appraise, and Apply—was used as the basis for defining seven EBM skills. These skills were targeted in the evidence-based, integrated design of 17 learning episodes delivered with eight faculty members through six courses in the first year. Student perceptions of relevance of EBM and performance on assessments and learning activities throughout the sequence suggest that integrating EBM across the first year of the curriculum is an effective strategy for teaching EBM skills. Three themes emerged from analysis of the data and experience, including the need for: a strong teaching team, a whole task approach with a focus on solving authentic problems, and care in interpreting the progression of assessments and patterns of student performance. Through instructor observations and peer review, the longitudinal sequence has been refined and has had an impact on the rest of the curriculum.   Type: Case Study


1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Ferlie ◽  
M. Wood ◽  
L. Fitzgerald

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pier Francesco Nocini ◽  
Giuseppe Verlato ◽  
Andrea Frustaci ◽  
Antonio de Gemmis ◽  
Giovanni Rigoni ◽  
...  

Evidence-based Dentistry (EBD), like Evidence-based Medicine (EBM), was born in order to seek the “best available research evidence” in the field of dentistry both in research and clinical routine.But evidence is not clearly measurable in all fields of healthcare: in particular, while drug effect is rather independent from clinician’s characteristics, the effectiveness of surgical procedures is strictly related to surgeon’s expertise, which is difficult to quantify. The research problems of dentistry have a lot in common with other surgical fields, where at the moment the best therapeutic recommendations and guidelines originates from an integration of evidence-based medicine and data from consensus conferences.To cope with these problems, new instruments have been developed, aimed at standardizing clinical procedures (CAD-CAM technology) and at integrating EBM achievements with the opinions of expert clinicians (GRADE System).One thing we have to remember however: it is necessary to use the instruments developed by evidence-based medicine but is impossible to produce sound knowledge without considering clinical expertise and quality of surgical procedures simultaneously. Only in this way we will obtain an evidence-based dentistry both in dental research and clinical practice, which is up to third millennium standards.


2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 14-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas A. Schnitzbauer ◽  
Andrea Proneth ◽  
Liset Pengel ◽  
Jörg Ansorg ◽  
Matthias Anthuber ◽  
...  

Background: Evidence-based medicine (EbM) is a vital part of reasonable and conclusive decision making for clinicians in daily clinical work. To analyze the knowledge and the attitude of surgeons towards EbM, a survey was performed in the UK and Germany. Methods: A web-based questionnaire was distributed via mailing lists from the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE) and the Berufsverband Deutscher Chirurgen (BDC). Our primary aim was to get information about knowledge of EbM amongst German and British surgeons. Results: A total of 549 individuals opened the questionnaire, but only 198 questionnaires were complete and valid for analysis. In total, 40,000 recipients were approached via the mailing lists of the BDC and RCSE. The response rate was equally low in both countries. On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 10 (very important), all participants rated EbM as very important for daily clinical decision making (7.3 ± 1.9) as well as for patients (7.8 ± 1.9) and the national health system (7.8 ± 1.9). On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 5 (very important), systematic reviews (4.6 ± 0.6) and randomized controlled trials (4.6 ± 0.6) were identified as the highest levels of study designs to enhance evidence in medicine. British surgeons considered EbM to be more important in daily clinical work when compared to data from German surgeons (7.9 ± 1.6 vs. 6.7 ± 2.1, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed different results in some categories; however, a pattern to explain the differences was not evident. Personal requirements expressed in a free text field emphasized the results and reflected concerns such as broad unwillingness and lack of interdisciplinary approaches for patients (n = 59: 25 in the UK and 34 in Germany). Conclusion: The overall results show that EbM is believed to be important by surgeons in the UK and Germany. However, perception of EbM in the respective health system (UK vs. Germany) may be different. Nonetheless, EbM is an important tool to navigate through daily clinical problems although a discrepancy between the knowledge of theoretical abstract terms and difficulties in implementing EbM in daily clinical work has been detected. The provision of infrastructure, courses and structured education as a permanent instrument will advance the knowledge, application and improvement of EbM in the future.


Author(s):  
Jan Buts ◽  
Mona Baker ◽  
Saturnino Luz ◽  
Eivind Engebretsen

AbstractEvidence-based medicine has been the subject of much controversy within and outside the field of medicine, with its detractors characterizing it as reductionist and authoritarian, and its proponents rejecting such characterization as a caricature of the actual practice. At the heart of this controversy is a complex linguistic and social process that cannot be illuminated by appealing to the semantics of the modifier evidence-based. The complexity lies in the nature of evidence as a basic concept that circulates in both expert and non-expert spheres of communication, supports different interpretations in different contexts, and is inherently open to contestation. We outline a new methodology that combines a social epistemological perspective with advanced methods of corpus linguistics and elements of conceptual history to investigate this and other basic concepts that underpin the practice and ethos of modern medicine. The potential of this methodology to offer new insights into controversies such as those surrounding EBM is demonstrated through a case study of the various meanings supported by evidence and based, as attested in a large electronic corpus of online material written by non-experts as well as a variety of experts in different fields, including medicine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document