Evidence-Based Medicine in the ICU

  • J.-L. Vincent
Conference paper


Current financial constraints across the medical sector, accompanied by increasing litigation by patients and/or relatives, has resulted in increasing pressure on physicians of all specialties to account for their actions and supply supported reasoning for their actions. In this context, evidence-based medicine (EBM) has been promoted as a tool to provide physicians with the necessary means to evaluate the current basis for any proposed intervention. Essentially, EBM must be seen as an approach to literature appraisal and application, and requires the ability to accurately assess the weight carried by the various levels of evidence and to integrate all the evidence available in an overall assessment of the intervention in question. EBM is thus an approach to clinical practice based on knowledge of the evidence, and the strength of that evidence, on which practice is based [l]. Increasingly EBM has become the buzz word for ‘good’ medical practice.


Intensive Care Medicine Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Acute Spinal Cord Injury Septic Morbidity Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    I. Cook DJ, Sibbald WJ, Vincent JL, Cerra FB (1996) Evidence based critical care medicine: What is it and what can it do for us? Crit Care Med 24: 334–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kunz R, Oxman AD (1998) The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. Br Med J 317: 1185–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vincent JL (1999) Which therapeutic interventions in critical care medicine have been shown to reduce mortality in prospective, randomized, clinical trials? A survey of candidates for the Belgian Board Examination in Intensive Care Medicine. Crit Care Med (in press)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Black N (1996) Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. Br Med J 312: 1215–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reinhart K, Wiegand-Lohnert C, Grimminger F et al (1996) Assessment of the safety and efficacy of the monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor antibody-fragment, MAK 195F, in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study [see comments] [published erratum appears in Crit Care Med 1996 Sep;24(9):1608]. Crit Care Med 24: 733–742Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baudo F, Caimi TM, de Cataldo F, et al (1998) Antithrombin III (ATIII) replacement therapy in patients with sepsis and/or postsurgical complications: a controlled double-blind, randomized, multicenter study [see comments]. Intensive Care Med 24: 336–342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anonymous (1992) American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference: definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. Crit Care Med 20: 864–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bossink AW, Groeneveld J, Hack CE, Thijs LG (1998) Prediction of mortality in febrile medical patients: How useful are systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis criteria? Chest 113: 1533–1541PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McKee M, Britton A, Black N et al (1999) Methods in health services research. Interpreting the evidence: choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies. BMJ 319: 312–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM (1995) The need for evidence-based medicine. J R Soc Med 88: 620–624PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anonymous (1992) Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 268: 2420–2425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA et al (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t [editorial]. BMJ 312: 71–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cook DJ, Guyatt Gil, Laupacis A, Sackett DL (1992) Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 102:305S-311 SGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cook DJ (1995) Clinical trials in the treatment of sepsis: An evidence-based approach. In: Sibbald WJ, Vincent JL (eds) Clinical trials for the treatment of sepsis. Springer, Heidelberg, pp XIX-XXXIGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amato MB, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM et al (1998) Effect of a protective-ventilation strategy on mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 338: 347–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moore EE, Jones TN (1986) Benefits of immediate jejunostomy feeding after major abdominal trauma–A prospective, randomized study. J Trauma 26: 874–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moore FA, Moore EE, Jones TN et al (1989) TEN versus TPN following major abdominal trauma–Reduced septic morbidity. J Trauma 29: 916–922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moore EE, Moore FA (1991) Immediate enteral nutrition following multisystem trauma: a decade perspective. J Am Coll Nutr 10: 633–648PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kudsk KA, Croce MA, Fabian TC et al (1992) Enteral versus parenteral feeding. Effects on septic morbidity after blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma. Ann Surg 215: 503–511Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shoemaker WC, Appel PL, Kram HB et al (1988) Prospective trial of supranormal values of survivors as therapeutic goals in high-risk surgical patients. Chest 94: 1176–1186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shoemaker WC, Appel PL, Kram HB (1992) Role of oxygen debt in the development of organ failure sepsis, and death in high-risk surgical patients. Chest 102: 208–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fleming A, Bishop M, Shoemaker W et al (1992) Prospective trial of supranormal values as goals of resuscitation in severe trauma. Arch Surg 127: 1175–1179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boyd O, Grounds RM, Bennett ED (1993) A randomized clinical trial of the effect of deliberate perioperative increase of oxygen delivery on mortality in high-risk surgical patients. JA-MA 270: 2699–2707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yu M, Levy MM, Smith P et al (1993) Effect of maximizing oxygen delivery on morbidity and mortality rates in critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Crit Care Med 21: 830–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hayes MA, Timmins AC, Yau EH et al (1994) Elevation of systemic oxygen delivery in the treatment of critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 330: 1717–1722PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gattinoni L, Brazzi L, Pelosi P et al (1995) A trial of goal-oriented hemodynamic therapy in critically ill patients. SvO2 Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med 333: 1025–1032PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bishop MH, Shoemaker WC, Appel PL et al (1995) Prospective, randomized trial of survivor values of cardiac index, oxygen delivery, and oxygen consumption as resuscitation endpoints in severe trauma. J Trauma 38: 780–787PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Keays R, Harrison PM, Wendon JA et al (1991) Intravenous acetylcysteine in paracetamol induced fulminant hepatic failure: a prospective controlled trial. BMJ 303: 1026–1029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jepsen S, Herlevsen P, Knudsen P et al (1992) Antioxidant treatment with N-acetylcysteine during adult respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Crit Care Med 20: 918–923PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Suter PM, Domenighetti G, Schaller MD et al (1994) N-acetylcysteine enhances recovery from acute lung injury in man. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. Chest 105: 190–194Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Domenighetti G, Suter PM, Schaller MD et al (1997) Treatment with N-acetylcysteine during acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. J Crit Care 12: 177–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bernard GR, Wheeler AP, Arons MM et al (1997) A trial of antioxidants N-acetylcysteine and procysteine in ARDS. The Antioxidant in ARDS Study Group. Chest 112: 164–172Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bott J, Carroll MP, Conway JH et al (1993) Randomised controlled trial of nasal ventilation in acute ventilatory failure due to chronic obstructive airways disease [see comments]. Lancet 341: 1555–1557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brochard L, Mancebo J, Wysocki M et al (1995) Noninvasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med 333: 817–822PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kramer N, Meyer TJ, Meharg J et al (1995) Randomized, prospective trial of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in acute respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 151: 1799–1806PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wysocki M, Tric L, Wolff MA et al (1995) Noninvasive pressure support ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure. A randomized comparison with conventional therapy. Chest 107: 761–768Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wedzicha JA (1996) Non-invasive ventilation for exacerbations of respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 51 [Suppl 2]: S35 - S39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wood KA, Lewis L, Von Harz B, Kollef MH (1998) The use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in the emergency department: results of a randomized clinical trial. Chest 113: 1339–1346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Clifton GL, Allen S, Barrodale Pet al (1993) A phase II study of moderate hypothermia in severe brain injury. J Neurotrauma 10: 263–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Marion DW, Penrod LE, Kelsey SF et al (1997) Treatment of traumatic brain injury with moderate hypothermia. N Engl J Med 336: 540–546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bracken MB, Shepard MJ, Collins WF et al (1990) A randomized, controlled trial of methylprednisolone or naloxone in the treatment of acute spinal-cord injury. Results of the Second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. N Engl J Med 322: 1405–1411Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bracken MB, Shepard MJ, Holford TR et al (1997) Administration of methylprednisolone for 24 or 48 hours or tirilazad mesylate for 48 hours in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury. Results of the Third National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Randomized Controlled Trial. National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. JAMA 277: 1597–1604Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • J.-L. Vincent

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations