Advertisement

Evidence-Based Medicine in the ICU

  • R. Jaeschke
  • G. Guyatt
  • M. Meade
Conference paper

Abstract

In daily routine work clinicians of all specialties must make a variety of decisions, including whose needs and problems to address first, what diagnostic tests to order, what treatments to recommend or institute, how to measure the results of those treatments interventions, how to predict the fate of the patients, and when to stop the diagnostic or therapeutic process. Those challenges and questions are particularly concentrated in the setting of an intensive care unit where the time to make decisions is limited by the acute nature of the underlying diseases, where available information is commonly incomplete, and where the consequences of decisions are frequently of immediate and major importance to the patients. Resuscitating, providing life support, and providing intensive monitoring in a setting of advanced diagnostic and therapeutic technology requires clinicians to rapidly decide who should receive such care, what are the potential alternative management strategies, and what are the risks, benefits and costs of each alternative. In making a final management decision clinicians must also consider patients and relatives’ values and preferences, as well as the societal, cultural, religious, moral, and legal implications of their choices.

Keywords

Medical Literature American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Therapeutic Technology Routine Work Clinician Traditional Medical Curriculum 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Guyatt GH (1991) Evidence-based medicine [editorial]. Ann Internal Medicine 114[Suppl 2]Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sacks HS, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr (1983) Sensitivity and specificity of clinical trials. Randomized versus historical assignment in controlled clinical trials. Arch Intern Med 143: 753–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG (1995) Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273:408–412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mulrow CD, Mulrow JP, Linn WD et al (1988) Relative efficacy of vasodilator therapy in chronic congestive heart failure. JAMA 259:3422–3426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Packer M, Carver JR, Rodeheffer RJ et al (1991) Effect of oral milrinone on mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 325:1468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The EC/IC Bypass Study Group (1985) Failure of extracranial-intracranial arterial bypass to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 313:1191–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 325:445–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB et al (1991) Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med 324:781–788PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McPherson K (1990) Why do variations occur? In: Anderson TF, Mooney G (eds) The challenges of medical practice variations. Macmillan, London, pp 16–35Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson GM, Lomas J (1989) Regionalization of coronary artery bypass surgery: effects on access. Med Care 27:288–296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B et al (1992) A comparison of meta-analyses of randomized trial and recommendations of clinical experts: Treatment of myocardial infarction. JAMA 268:240–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fahey T, Griffiths S, Peters TJ (1995) Evidence based purchasing: understanding results of clinical trials and systematic reviews. BMJ 311:1056–1060PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Naylor CD (1995) Grey zones of clinical practice: Some limits to evidence-based medicine. Lancet 345:840–842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chalmers I (1983) Scientific inquiry and authoritarianism in perinatal care and education. Birth 10:151–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hayward R, Wilson MC, Tunis SR et al and the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (1995) Users’ guides to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines. Part A. Are the recommendations valid? JAMA 274:570–574PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair J et al (1995) Users’ guides to the medical literature. IX. A Method for grading health care recommendations. JAMA 274:1800–1804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hope T (1995) Evidence based patient choice. Report to the Anglia and Oxford Health Authority into the use of evidence based information for enhancing patient choice. Anglia and Oxford Regional Health Authority, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guyatt GH, Rennie D (1993) Users’ guides to the medical literature: Editorial. JAMA 270: 2096–2097PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB (1997) Evidence-based medicine. Churchill Livingston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1993). Users’ guides to the medical literature. I. How to get started. JAMA 270:2093–2095PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1993) Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. Part A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA 270:2598–2601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1994) Users’ guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. Part A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA 271:389–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Levine M, Walter S, Lee H et al for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1994) Users’ guides to the medical literature. IV How to use an article about harm. JAMA 271: 1615–1619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laupacis A, Wells G, Richardson S, Tugwell P for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1994) Users’ guides to the medical literature. V How to use an article about prognosis. JAMA 272:234–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wilson MC, Hayward R, Tunis SR et al for the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (1995) Users’ Guides to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines. B. What are the recommendations and will they help me in caring for my patients? JAMA 274:1630–1632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ for the Evidence-based Medicine Working Group (1994) Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. Part B. What were the results and will they help me in caring for my patients. JAMA 271: 59–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kilbourn RG (1997) Evidence based medicine in critical care: Will it takes us over the cutting edge? Crit Care Med 25:1448–1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Jaeschke
    • 1
  • G. Guyatt
    • 2
  • M. Meade
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of MedicineMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Dept. of Medicine and Dept. of Clinical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMcMaster UniversityHamiltonUSA

Personalised recommendations