...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of evaluation in clinical practice >Harnessing experience: exploring the gap between evidence-based medicine and clinical practice.
【24h】

Harnessing experience: exploring the gap between evidence-based medicine and clinical practice.

机译:利用经验:探索循证医学与临床实践之间的差距。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Rationale, aims and objectives There is mounting evidence of a gap between Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) and physician clinical practice, in part because EBM is averaged global evidence gathered from exogenous populations which may not be relevant to local circumstances. Local endogenous evidence, collected in particular and 'real world' patient populations may be more relevant, convincing and timely for clinical practice. Evidence Farming (EF) is a concept to provide such local evidence through the systematic collection of clinical experience to guide more effective practice. Methods We report on the findings of a pilot study of 29 individual and three focus group (n = 10) interviews exploring physicians' evaluations how they use multiple sources of information in clinical decision making and their thoughts on EF. Results Physicians recognize a gap in translating EBM to practice. Physicians reported that when making clinical decisions, they more often rely on clinical experience, the opinions of colleagues and EBM summarizing electronic clinical resources rather than refer directly to EBM literature. Confidence in making decisions based on clinical experience increases over time, yet few physicians reported having systems for tracking their clinical experience in designing treatment plans and patient outcomes. Most physicians saw EF as a promising way to track experience, thereby making scientific evidence more relevant to their own clinical practices. Conclusion Clinical experience is relatively neglected by the EBM movement, but if that experience were systematically gathered through an approach such as EF, it would meet a need left unfulfilled by EBM.
机译:理由,目的和目标越来越多的证据表明循证医学(EBM)与医师临床实践之间存在差距,部分原因是EBM是从外来人口中收集的平均全球证据,可能与当地情况无关。特别是和“现实世界”患者人群中收集的本地内源性证据对于临床实践而言可能更为相关,令人信服和及时。证据农业(EF)是通过系统地收集临床经验以指导更有效的实践来提供此类本地证据的概念。方法我们报告了一项针对29个个体和三个焦点小组(n = 10)访谈的试点研究结果,探讨了医生对他们如何在临床决策中使用多种信息来源以及他们对EF的看法的评估。结果内科医生认识到将EBM转换为实践方面存在差距。医师报告说,在做出临床决策时,他们更多地依赖于临床经验,同事和EBM的意见来总结电子临床资源,而不是直接参考EBM文献。随着时间的流逝,基于临床经验做出决策的信心增加,但是很少有医生报告拥有在设计治疗计划和患者预后时跟踪其临床经验的系统。大多数医生认为EF是追踪经验的一种有前途的方式,从而使科学证据与他们自己的临床实践更加相关。结论EBM运动相对忽略了临床经验,但是如果通过诸如EF之类的方法系统地收集了该经验,则将满足EBM无法满足的需求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号