Medical practice is rooted in our dependence on the best available evidence from incremental scientific experimentation and rigorous clinical trials. Progress toward determining the true worth of ongoing practice or suggested innovations can be glacially slow when we insist on following the stepwise scientific pathway, and a prevailing but imperfect paradigm often proves difficult to challenge. Yet most experienced clinicians and clinical scientists harbor strong thoughts about how care could or should be improved, even if the existing evidence base is thin or lacking. One of our Future of Critical Care Medicine conference sessions encouraged sharing of novel ideas, each presented with what the speaker considers a defensible rationale. Our intent was to stimulate insightful thinking and free interchange, and perhaps to point in new directions toward lines of innovative theory and improved care of the critically ill. In what follows, a brief background outlines the rationale for each novel and deliberately provocative unconfirmed idea endorsed by the presenter.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699060 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc14719 | DOI Listing |
Medical practice is rooted in our dependence on the best available evidence from incremental scientific experimentation and rigorous clinical trials. Progress toward determining the true worth of ongoing practice or suggested innovations can be glacially slow when we insist on following the stepwise scientific pathway, and a prevailing but imperfect paradigm often proves difficult to challenge. Yet most experienced clinicians and clinical scientists harbor strong thoughts about how care could or should be improved, even if the existing evidence base is thin or lacking.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCrit Care
September 2013
University of Minnesota, Regions Hospital MS11203B, 640 Jackson Street, St Paul, MN 55101, USA.
The future of critical care medicine will be shaped not only by the evidence-validated foundations of science, but also by innovations based on unproven and, in many cases, untested concepts and thoughtful visions of scientists and clinicians familiar with the complex problems actually faced in clinical practice. Clinical investigations and trials often lag behind collective experience and impressions, in a well-intentioned and necessary quest to determine the fallacy or validity of ongoing practice. Progress made in this way can be painfully slow, and imperfect theory may prove difficult to challenge.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!