Evidence-Based Clinical Decision Making: A Framework to Guide Clinical Practice (Exemplar: Preconception Counseling)

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Charron-Prochownik
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Preconception Counseling

scholarly journals Reframing Perceptions in Restorative Dentistry: Evidence-Based Dentistry and Clinical Decision-Making

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ayah A Al-Asmar ◽  
Ahmad S Al-Hiyasat ◽  
Motasum Abu-Awwad ◽  
Hakam N Mousa ◽  
Nesreen A Salim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Root Canal Treatment ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Dental Practice ◽  
Restorative Dentistry ◽  
Evidence Based Dentistry

Objectives. The worldwide interest of both dentists and patients in esthetic dentistry has affected decision-making in dental practice. The aim of this study was to investigate contemporary dental practice in restorative dentistry and the relationship between evidence-based dentistry in caries research and decision-making in clinical practice in restorative dentistry. Methods. The study was conducted through a structured questionnaire distributed randomly at the Jordanian Dental Association registered dentists in Jordan. The questionnaire aimed to clarify the degree of knowledge and practice of evidence-based dentistry in caries research the dentists hold regarding clinical decision-making in restorative dentistry. Results. The majority of the surveyed dentists (77%) treat teeth with irreversible pulpitis with root canal treatment rather than vital pulp therapy. 13.8% routinely insert a post and 23% routinely crown the tooth after root canal treatment regardless of the remaining tooth structure. Badly damaged teeth are treated with full crowns in 72% of the cases. Regarding Hollywood smile or smile makeover, the majority of dentists choose conservative approaches, and implants were the first choice to replace missing teeth for 93.8% of the surveyed dentists. Conclusion. A higher degree of implementation of evidence-based dentistry in clinical decision-making was found in Prosthetic Dentistry than in Endodontics. Yet, the gap between evidence-based data and clinical practice needs bridging. More emphasis on communicating these data to educators to integrate them into the dental curriculum is a must.

scholarly journals Desenvolvimento e Avaliação de uma Plataforma Colaborativa Digital para Educação e Tomada de Decisão Médica Baseada em Evidências

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (1 suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 513-524
Author(s):  
Álisson Oliveira dos Santos ◽  
Alexandre Sztajnberg ◽  
Tales Mota Machado ◽  
Daniel Magalhães Nobre ◽  
Adriano Neves de Paula e Souza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Life Problems

ABSTRACT The medical education for clinical decision-making has undergone changes in recent years. Previously supported by printed material, problem solving in clinical practice has recently been aided by digital tools known as summaries platforms. Doctors and medical students have been using such tools from questions found in practice scenarios. These platforms have the advantage of high-quality, evidence-based and always up-to-date content. Its popularization was mainly due to the rise of the internet use and, more recently, of mobile devices such as tablets and smartphones, facilitating their use in clinical practice. Despite this platform is widely available, the most of them actually present several access barriers as costs, foreign language and not be able to Brazilian epidemiology. A free national platform of evidence-based medical summaries was proposed, using the crowdsourcing concept to resolve those barriers. Furthermore, concepts of gamification and content evaluation were implemented. Also, there is the possibility of evaluation by the users, who assigns note for each content created. The platform was built with modern technological tools and made available for web and mobile application. After development, an evaluation process was conducted by researchers to attest to the valid of content, usability, and user satisfying. Consolidated questionnaires and evaluation tools by the literature were applied. The process of developing the digital platform fostered interdisciplinarity, from the involvement of medical and information technology professionals. The work also allowed the reflection on the innovative educational processes, in which the learning from real life problems and the construction of knowledge in a collaborative way are integrated. The assessment results suggest that platform can be real alternative form the evidence-based medical decision-making.

scholarly journals Progress in Clinical Neurosciences: Evidence Based Care in the Neurosciences

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Wiebe ◽  
Bart Demaerschalk
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Content Accessibility ◽  
Evidence Based Care

Abstract:We examine the relevance of Evidence Based Care (EBC) to the field of clinical neurosciences, with particular emphasis on feasible methods of implementing EBC in clinical practice. By using pre-appraised EBC summaries, busy clinicians can move toward EBC without engaging in the laborious process of searching and critically appraising the literature. After reviewing the neurological content, accessibility and ease of use of current sources of EBC summaries, we find them substantially lacking in coverage of the neurosciences, and therefore of limited use to clinicians in this field. We emphasize a particular type of EBC summary, the critically appraised topic, and comment on its usefulness and limitations as a tool to assist clinical decision-making in the neurosciences. Finally, we propose that a collection of easily accessible, good quality, peer reviewed critically appraised topics, covering a breadth of relevant topics, is a reasonable way of moving toward EBC in the clinical neurosciences.

scholarly journals 28 How is Postpartum Depression Currently Diagnosed and Managed? Insights from a Virtual Patient Simulation

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-190
Author(s):  
Jovana Lubarda ◽  
Martin Warters ◽  
Piyali Chatterjee ◽  
Marlene P. Freeman ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Postpartum Depression ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Patient Simulation ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Virtual Patient ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Decisions ◽  
Practice Gaps

AbstractObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine physician performance in diagnosis and management of postpartum depression (PPD) and to provide needed education in the consequence free environment of a virtual patient simulation (VPS).Methods∙ A continuing medical education activity was delivered via an online VPS learning platform that offers a lifelike clinical care experience with complete freedom of choice in clinical decision-making and expert personalized feedback to address learner’s practice gaps∙ Physicians including psychiatrists, primary care physicians (PCPs), and obstetricians/gynecologists (ob/gyns) were presented with two cases of PPD designed to model the experience of actual practice by including use of electronic health records∙ Following virtual interactions with patients, physicians were asked to make decisions regarding assessments, diagnoses, and pharmacologic therapies. The clinical decisions were analyzed using a sophisticated decision engine, and clinical guidance (CG) based on current evidence-based recommendations was provided in response to learners’ clinical decisions∙ Impact of the education was measured by comparing participant decisions pre- and post-CG using a 2-tailed, paired t-test; P <.05 was considered statistically significant∙ The activity launched on Medscape Education on April 26, 2018, and data were collected through to June 17,2018.Results∙ From pre- to post-CG in the simulation, physicians were more likely to make evidence-based clinical decisions related to:∙ Ordering appropriate baseline tests including tools/scales to screen for PPD: in case 1, psychiatrists (n=624) improved from 34% to 42% on average (P<.05); PCPs (n=197) improved from 38% to 48% on average (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=216) improved from 30% to 38% on average (P<.05)∙ Diagnosing moderate-to-severe PPD: in case 2, psychiatrists (n=531) improved from 46% to 62% (P<.05); PCPs (n=154) improved from 43% to 55% (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=137) improved from 55% to 73% (P<.05)∙ Ordering appropriate treatments for moderate-to-severe PPD such as selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors: in case 2, psychiatrists (n=531) improved from 47% CG to 75% (P<.05); PCPs (n=154) improved from 55% to 74% (P<.05); and, ob/gyns (n=137) improved from 51% to 78% (P<.05)∙ Interestingly, a small percentage of physicians (average of 5%) chose investigational agents for PPD which were in clinical trials pre-CG, and this increased to an average of 9% post-CGConclusionsPhysicians who participated in VPS-based education significantly improved their clinical decision-making in PPD, particularly in selection of validated screening tools/scales, diagnosis, and pharmacologic treatments based on severity. Given that VPS immerses physicians in an authentic, practical learning experience matching the scope of clinical practice, this type of intervention can be used to determine clinical practice gaps and translate knowledge into practice.Funding Acknowledgements: The educational activity and outcomes measurement were funded through an independent educational grant from Sage Therapeutics, Inc.

scholarly journals A sociodental approach in prosthodontic treatment decision making

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cláudio Rodrigues Leles ◽  
Maria do Carmo Matias Freire
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Critical Problem ◽  
Practice Model ◽  
Treatment Decision Making

A critical problem in the decision making process for dental prosthodontic treatment is the lack of reliable clinical parameters. This review discusses the limits of traditional normative treatment and presents guidelines for clinical decision making. There is a need to incorporate a sociodental approach to help determine patient's needs. Adoption of the evidence-based clinical practice model is also needed to assure safe and effective clinical practice in prosthetic dentistry.

scholarly journals Qualitative study of cardiologists’ perceptions of factors influencing clinical practice decisions

Heart ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 105 (10) ◽  
pp. 749-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veena Manja ◽  
Gordon Guyatt ◽  
John You ◽  
Sandra Monteiro ◽  
Susan Jack
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Health System ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Health Spending ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The Usa

BackgroundHealthcare costs are increasing in the USA and Canada and a substantial portion of health spending is devoted to services that do not improve health outcomes. Efforts to reduce waste by adopting evidence-based clinical practice guideline recommendations have had limited success. We sought insight into improving health system efficiency through understanding cardiologists’ perceptions of factors that influence clinical decision-making.MethodsIn this descriptive qualitative study, we conducted in-depth interviews with 18 American and 3 Canadian cardiologists. We used conventional content analysis including inductive and deductive approaches for data analysis and mapped findings to the ecological systems framework.ResultsPhysicians reported that major determinants of practice included interpersonal interactions with peers, patients and administrators; financial incentives and system factors. Patients’ insurance status represented an important consideration for some cardiologists. Other major influences included time constraints, fear of litigation (less prominent in Canada), a sense that their obligation was never to miss any underlying pathology, and patient demands. The need to bring income into their health system influenced American cardiologists’ practice; personal income implications influenced Canadian cardiologists’ practice. Cardiologists reported that knowledge limitations and logistical challenges limit their ability to assist patients with cost considerations. All these considerations were more influential than guidelines; some cardiologists expressed a high level of scepticism regarding guidelines.ConclusionsClinical decision-making by cardiologists is shaped by individual, interpersonal, organisational, environmental, financial and sociopolitical influences and only to a limited extent by guideline recommendations. Successful strategies to achieve efficient, evidence-based care will require addressing socioecological influences on decision-making.

Challenges to Evidence-Based Prescribing in Clinical Practice

2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 704-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Mamdani ◽  
Andrew Ching ◽  
Brian Golden ◽  
Magda Melo ◽  
Ulrich Menzefricke
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Competing Demands ◽  
Drug Policies ◽  
Clinical Conditions ◽  
Based Medicine

Although there appears to be widespread support of evidence-based medicine as a basis for rational prescribing, the challenges to it are signilicant and often justified. A multitude of factors other than evidence drive clinical decision-making, including patient preferences and social circumstances, presence of diseasedrug and drug-drug interactions, clinical experience, competing demands from more pressing clinical conditions, marketing and promotional activity, and systemlevel drug policies.

scholarly journals Methods for the Development of Healthcare Practice Recommendations Using Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Platz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Practice Recommendations ◽  
Meta Analyses

Quality of healthcare can be improved when the best external evidence available is integrated in clinical decision-making in a systematic explicit manner. With the rapid expansion of clinical evidence, the opportunities for evidence-based high-quality healthcare increase. Paradoxically, the likelihood of any one person to get a complete and balanced picture of the evidence available decreases. This is especially true for rehabilitation interventions that are complex in nature and where clinical research is rather diverse. Given the complex nature of the evidence, there is a substantial risk of misinterpreting the complex information both at the level of individual sources (e.g., reports of clinical trials) and for aggregated data syntheses (e.g., systematic reviews and meta-analyses). These risks are inherent in these sources themselves and are in addition related to the methodological expertise necessary to make valid use of the evidence for clinical decision-making. Taken together, there is a great demand for systematic structured guidance from evidence to clinical decision. This methodology paper describes a structured process for the development and report of evidence-based clinical practice recommendations that uses systematic reviews and meta-analyses as evidence source. It provides a comprehensive framework with specific requirements for the development group, the formulation of the healthcare question addressed, the systematic search for the evidence, its critical appraisal, the extraction and the outcome-centered presentation of the evidence, the rating of its quality, strengths and weaknesses, any further considerations relevant for decision-making, and an explicit recommendation statement along with its justification, implementation, and resource aspects. The suggested methodology uses international standards in evidence synthesis, critical appraisal of systematic reviews, rating the quality of evidence, characteristics of recommendations, and guideline development as developed by Cochrane, GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation), AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews), and AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch &amp; Evaluation). An added distinctive feature of the methodology is to focus on the most up-to-date, most valid evidence and hence to support the development of valid practice recommendations in an efficient way. Practice recommendations generated by such a valid methodology would be generally applicable and promote evidence-based clinical practice globally.

Person-centred clinical reasoning and evidence-based healthcare

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 215
Author(s):  
Roger Kerry ◽  
Matthew Low ◽  
Peter O'Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Reasoning ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Population Data ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Healthcare ◽  
Causal Theories

Purpose: Clinical practice, and in particular decision-making, are dependent on data and knowledge which are relevant to the context at hand. Numerous frameworks have existed which aim to facilitate best clinical decision-making for healthcare professionals and their patients, for example clinical reasoning and the evidence-based healthcare models. The purpose of this paper is to provide some reconciliation between apparently conflicting models of healthcare practice with regards to best practice.Methods: We provide a theoretical narrative account of clinical practice with regards to clinical reasoning and best decision-making. We problematise the practice frameworks of clinical reasoning and evidence base healthcare by suggesting they are conflicting and contradictory to each other. We frame the arguments available with philosophical views of causation, making the assumption that causation lies central to all aspects of knowledge. We use the narrative to expose causal theories behind different practice models and illustrate our account with a case study.Results: Clinical reasoning and evidence-based healthcare are characterised by different causal theories which do not readily align with each other. By reconceptualising causation as a dispositional phenomenon, reconciliation between individualised person-centred care and the population data which are the core interest of evidence-based healthcare, can be found, thus preserving the most valuable aspects of each practice framework.Conclusion: Reconceptualising causation in dispositionalist terms facilitates a more person-centred, multi-dimensional clinical reasoning process. This in-turn allows for the integration of data from prioritised methods of evidence-based healthcare into complex and context-sensitive individualised clinical situations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document