Advertisement

Evidence-Based Rheumatology

  • Yasser El Miedany
Chapter

Abstract

Over the past years, there has been rapidly growing emphasis on teaching quality and the enhancement of the student learning experience. The evidence-based medicine paradigm came to prominence in the early 1990s adopting the use of scientific evidence to support history taking, physical assessment and diagnostic approach in the patients’ management decision process. Following on the evidence-based medicine is the more generic evidence-based practice paradigm, where the practice within a specific discipline or profession is guided by the scientific evidence that supports the day-to-day practice. For the evidence-based education paradigm, the evidence is used to identify methods for teaching, assessment and development of the education process. This chapter will provide an overview of key concepts relevant to general evidence-based education for health professionals, the relationship between evidence-based education and evidence-based practice, followed by the evidence-based practice specific for rheumatology.

Keywords

Evidence-based medicine Evidence-based education Evidence-based practice Evidence-based rheumatology Rheumatology learning Student-centred learning 

References

  1. 1.
    Strauss SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P. Evidence based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cannon S, Boswell C. Evidence based teaching in nursing: a foundation for educators. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Learning; 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ginsberg SM, Friberg J, Visconti C. Scholarship of teaching and learning in speech language pathology and audiology: evidence based medicine. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2012.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Petersen S. Time for evidence based medical education. BMJ. 1999;316(719):1223–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shulman LS. Knowledge and teaching foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educ Rev. 1987;57(1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beck DE. Pharmacy educators: can an evidence-based approach make your instruction better tomorrow than today? Am J Pharm Educ. 2002;66(1):87–8.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ferguson L, Day RA. Evidence-based nursing education: myth or reality? J Nurs Educ. 2005;44(3):107–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loyola S. Evidence-based teaching guidelines: transforming knowledge into practice for better outcomes in healthcare. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2010;33(1):19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown T. Chapter 4, Evidence based education and health professional education. In: Brown T, Williams B, editors. Evidence-based education in the health profession. London: Radcliffe; 2015. p. 31–46.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davies P. What is evidence based education? Br J Educ Stud. 1999;47(2):108–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saewert KJ, Hagler D. The five a’s of the scholarship of teaching and learning: ask, access, answer, apprise and apply. In: Brown T, Williams B, editors. Evidence-based education in the health professions: promoting best practice in the learning and teaching of students. Abingdon: Radcliffe; 2015. CRC Press, ISBN 9781909368712.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ambrose S, Bridges M, Di Pietro M. How learning works: 7 research based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass and Wiley Publishers; 2010.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Korach S. You are the curriculum: participant identification of experience and practice with impact. Plan Chang. 2012;43(1–2):149–60.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Di Napoli R. What is student centred learning? London: Educational Initiative Centre, University of Westminster; 2004.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Attard A, Di Ioio E, Geven K. Student centred learning: an insight into theory and practice. Bucharest: EU Educational international; 2010.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bandura A. Social foundation of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1986.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mann K, Gordon J, Mac Leod A. Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009;14(4):595–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chi MTH, Roy M, Hausmann RGM. Observing tutorial dialogues collaboratively: insights about human tutoring effectiveness from various learning. Cogn Sci. 2008;32(2):301–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roscoe RD, Chi MTH. Tutor learning: the role of explaining and responding to questions. Instr Sci. 2008;36:321–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bloom BS. The 2 sigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educ Res. 1984;13(6):4–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hafferty FW. Beyond curriculum reform: confronting medicine’s hidden curriculum. Acad Med. 1998;73(4):403–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC). Standards for pre-registration. Nursing education. London: NMC; 2012.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Margolis E, Soldatenko M, Ackers S. Peekaboo: hiding and outing the curriculum. In: Margolis E, editor. The hidden curriculum in higher education. New York: Routledge; 2001. p. 1–19.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Monrouxe LV, Rees CE, Endacott R. Even now it makes me angry: health care students professionalism dilemma narrative. Med Educ. 2014;48(5):502–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stern DT. In search of the informal curriculum: when and where professional values are taught. Acad Med. 1998;73(10 Suppl):S28–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Biggs JB. Teaching for quality learning at university. 2nd ed. Buckingham: Open university Press for Research into Higher Education; 2003.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Meyer JHE, Land R. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practising. In: Rust C, editor. Improving student learning. Theory and practice ten years on. Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development; 2003. p. 1–15.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dollaghan CA. The handbook for evidence based practice in communication disorders. Baltimore: Paul H Brookes; 2007.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schlosser R, Raghavendra P. Evidence based practice in augmentative and alternative communication. Augment Altern Commun. 2004;20(1):1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ginsburg S, Friberg J, Visconti CF. Scholarship of teaching and learning in speech language pathology and audiology: evidence based education. San Diego: Plural publishing; 2012.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rosenberg W, Donald A. Evidence-based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ. 1995;310:1122–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    El Miedany Y. Adopting patient-centered care in standard practice: PROMs moving toward disease-specific era. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014;32(Suppl. 85):S40–6.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tugwell P, Bombardier C. A methodologic framework for developing and selecting endpoints in clinical trials. J Rheumatol. 1982;9:758–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bombardier C, Tugwell P. A methodological framework to develop and select indices for clinical trials: statistical and judgmental approaches. J Rheumatol. 1982;9:753–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Singh, Furst D, Bharat A, et al. Update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of diseasemodifying anti-rheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2012;64:625–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Smolen J, Landewé R, Breedveld F, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2009.126532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    National I Nstitute For Health And Clinical Excellence. The management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults. London: NICE; 2009. www.nice.org.uk/CG79. Accessed 16 June 2017.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, et al. The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum. 1993;36:729–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Smolen J, Keystone E. Future of RA: building on what we know and tailoring treatment biologic therapies beyond conventional DMARDs. Rheumatology. 2012;51:v55–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    El Miedany Y. PROMs in inflammatory arthritis: moving from static to dynamic. Clin Rheumatol. 2013;32:735–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Neher M, Stahl C, Festin K, Nilsen P. Implementation of evidence-based practice in rheumatology: what sociodemographic, social cognitive and contextual factors influence health professionals’ use of research in practice? J Rheum Dis Treat. 2016;2:039.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Straus SE. Evidence-based health care: challenges and limitations. Evid-Based Commun Assess Interv. 2007;1:48–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Olsson T. Reconstructing evidence-based practice: an investigation of three conceptualisations of EBP. Evid Policy. 2007;3:271–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yost J, Ganann R, Thompson D, Aloweni F, Newman K, et al. The effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions for promoting evidenceinformed decision-making among nurses in tertiary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci. 2015;10:98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Aarons A, Ehrhart MG, Farahnak LR, Sklar M. Aligning leadership across systems and organizations to develop a strategic climate for evidencebased practice implementation. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014:255–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rycroft-Malone J, Burton CR, Harvey G, McCormack B, Graham I, et al. Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). Implement Sci. 2011;6:74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Presseau J, Johnson M, Heponiemi T, Elovainio M, Francis JJ, et al. Reflective and automatic processes in health care professional behaviour: a dual process model tested across multiple behaviours. Ann Behav Med. 2014;48:347–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:377–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:1728–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pendleton A, Arden N, Dougados M, Doherty M, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma JWJ, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the standing committee for international clinical studies including therapeutic trials (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis. 2000;59:936–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bohlin I, Sager M. Evidensens många ansikten. Lund: Arkiv; 2011. (Lettland).Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gupta S. Evidence-based practice of rheumatology: a view-point. Indian J Rheumatol. 2007;2(2):72–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasser El Miedany
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.King’s College London, Darent Valley HospitalDartfordUK
  2. 2.Rheumatology and RehabilitationAin Shams UniversityCairoEgypt

Personalised recommendations