scholarly journals An Evidence-Based Health Care Knowledge Integration System: Assessment Protocol (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Véronique Nabelsi ◽  
Sylvain Croteau

BACKGROUND The rapid advancements in health care can make it difficult for general physicians and specialists alike to keep their knowledge up to date. In medicine today, there are deficiencies in the application of knowledge translation (KT) in clinical practice. Some medical procedures are not required, and therefore, no value is added to the patient’s care. These unnecessary procedures increase pressures on the health care system’s resources, reduce the quality of care, and expose the patients to stress and to other potential risks. KT tools and better access to medical recommendations can lead to improvements in physicians’ decision-making processes depending on the patient’s specific clinical situation. These tools can provide the physicians with the available options and promote an efficient professional practice. Software for the Evolution of Knowledge in MEDicine (SEKMED) is a technological solution providing access to high-quality evidence, based on just-in-time principles, in the application of medical recommendations for clinical decision-making processes recognized by community members, accreditation bodies, the recommendations from medical specialty societies made available through campaigns such as Choosing Wisely, and different standards or accreditive bodies. OBJECTIVE The main objective of this protocol is to assess the usefulness of the SEKMED platform used within a real working clinical practice, specifically the Centre intégré de santé et des services sociaux de l’Outaouais in Quebec, Canada. To achieve our main objective, 20 emergency physicians from the Hull and Gatineau Hospitals participate in the project as well as 20 patient care unit physicians from the Hull Hospital. In addition, 10 external students or residents studying family medicine from McGill University will also participate in our study. METHODS The project is divided into 4 phases: (1) orientation; (2) data synthesis; (3) develop and validate the recommendations; and (4) implement, monitor, and update the recommendations. These phases will enable us to meet our 6 specific research objectives that aim to measure the integration of recommendations in clinical practices, the before and after improvements in practices, the value attributed by physicians to recommendations, the user’s platform experience, the educational benefits according to medical students, and the organizational benefits according to stakeholders. The knowledge gained during each phase will be applied on an iterative and continuous basis to all other phases over a period of 2 years. RESULTS This project was funded in April 2018 by the Fonds de soutien à l’innovation en santé et en services sociaux for 24 months. Ethics approval has been attained, the study began in June 2018, the data collection will be complete at the end of December 2019, and the data analysis will start in winter 2020. Both major city hospitals in the Outaouais region, Quebec, Canada, have agreed to participate in the project. CONCLUSIONS If results show preliminary efficacy and usability of the system, a large-scale implementation will be conducted. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR DERR1-10.2196/11754

1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 585-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Granados

This paper examines the rationality of the concepts underlying evidence—based medicineand health technology assessment (HTA), which are part of a new current aimed at promoting the use of the results of scientific studies for decision making in health care. It describes the different approaches and purposes of this worldwide movement, in relation to clinical decision making, through a summarized set of specific HTA case studies from Catalonia, Spain. The examples illustrate how the systematic process of HTA can help in several types of uncertainties related to clinical decision making.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 178-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul R. Falzer

A recent essay in this journal identified health care as a fertile domain for extending the reach of naturalistic decision making (NDM). It targeted the “best practices regimen,” a host of initiatives begun in the late 20th century that address problems in service delivery, skyrocketing costs, and impediments in transforming products of basic science into effective treatments. Of particular importance are efforts to base treatment decisions on empirical research findings and to gauge the quality of decisions by their conformance to evidence-based practices. The challenges that the essay identified and the ways of addressing these challenges are well known in the health care community. They have had limited impact owing to several factors, including how advocates of the best practices regimen envision clinical decision making and their tendency to equate the exercise of skill with resistance to change. This paper describes the regimen’s concept of decision making and its principles and deficiencies. It also identifies a conundrum: oversimplification prevents complexity from being recognized; as a result, evidence-based recommendations frequently have unforeseeable and deleterious consequences. The paper proposes that NDM is well positioned to address these problems and make a valuable contribution to health care practice. It illustrates NDM-based theories and concepts with a research example and describes their ability to address complex issues that arise in treating chronic illnesses.


1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Dowie

Within ‘evidence-based medicine and health care’ the ‘number needed to treat’ (NNT) has been promoted as the most clinically useful measure of the effectiveness of interventions as established by research. Is the NNT, in either its simple or adjusted form, ‘easily understood’, ‘intuitively meaningful’, ‘clinically useful’ and likely to bring about the substantial improvements in patient care and public health envisaged by those who recommend its use? The key evidence against the NNT is the consistent format effect revealed in studies that present respondents with mathematically-equivalent statements regarding trial results. Problems of understanding aside, trying to overcome the limitations of the simple (major adverse event) NNT by adding an equivalent measure for harm (‘number needed to harm’ NNH) means the NNT loses its key claim to be a single yardstick. Integration of the NNT and NNH, and attempts to take into account the wider consequences of treatment options, can be attempted by either a ‘clinical judgement’ or an analytical route. The former means abandoning the explicit and rigorous transparency urged in evidence-based medicine. The attempt to produce an ‘adjusted’ NNT by an analytical approach has succeeded, but the procedure involves carrying out a prior decision analysis. The calculation of an adjusted NNT from that analysis is a redundant extra step, the only action necessary being comparison of the results for each option and determination of the optimal one. The adjusted NNT has no role in clinical decision-making, defined as requiring patient utilities, because the latter are measurable only on an interval scale and cannot be transformed into a ratio measure (which the adjusted NNT is implied to be). In any case, the NNT always represents the intrusion of population-based reasoning into 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 ◽  
...  

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.


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 ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
Samuel Wiebe ◽  
Bart Demaerschalk

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.


CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-190
Author(s):  
Jovana Lubarda ◽  
Martin Warters ◽  
Piyali Chatterjee ◽  
Marlene P. Freeman ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre

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.


Author(s):  
Beth A Clark ◽  
Alice Virani ◽  
Sheila K Marshall ◽  
Elizabeth M Saewyc

Abstract Information is lacking on the role shared decision making plays in the care of transgender (trans) youth. This qualitative, descriptive study explored how trans youth, parents and health care providers engaged or did not engage in shared decision-making practices around hormone therapy initiation and what conditions supported shared decision-making approaches in clinical practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 47 participants in British Columbia, Canada, and analyzed using a constructivist grounded theory approach. While formal shared decision-making models were not used in practice, many participants described elements of such approaches when asked about their health care decision-making processes. Others described health care interactions that were not conducive to a shared decision-making approach. The key finding that emerged through this analysis was a set of five conditions for supporting shared decision making when making decisions surrounding initiation of hormone therapy with trans youth. Both supportive relationships and open communication were necessary among participants to support shared decision making. All parties needed to agree regarding what decisions were to be made and what role each person would play in the process. Finally, adequate time was needed for decision-making processes to unfold. When stakeholders meet these five conditions, a gender-affirming and culturally safer shared decision-making approach may be used to support decision making about gender-affirming care. Implications for clinical practice and future research are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document