Posted on 06/16/2019 5:12:11 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
Scientists have identified nearly 400 established medical practices that have been found to be ineffective by clinical studies published across three top medical journals.
Writing in the journal eLife, the team hope their findings will encourage the de-adoption of these practices, also known as medical reversals, ultimately making patient care more efficient and cost effective.
Medical reversals are practices that have been found to be no better than prior or lesser standards of care, through randomised controlled trials (RCTs: studies that aim to reduce certain types of bias when testing new treatments). But it can be difficult to identify these practices. For example, Cochrane Reviews provide high-quality evidence on medical practices, but only one practice is covered in each review and many have not been reviewed in this way. Additionally, the Choosing Wisely initiative in the US aims to maintain a list of low-value medical practices, but it relies on medical organisations to report them.
Cardiovascular disease was the most commonly represented medical category among the reversals (20%), followed by public health/preventive medicine (12%) and critical care (11%). In terms of the type of intervention, medication was the most common (33%), followed by a procedure (20%) and vitamins and/or supplements (13%).
“Once an ineffective practice is established, it may be difficult to convince practitioners to abandon its use. By aiming to test novel treatments rigorously before they become widespread, we can reduce the number of reversals in practice and prevent unnecessary harm to patients.
"Taken together, we hope our findings will help push medical professionals to evaluate their own practices critically and demand high-quality research before adopting a new practice in future, especially for those that are more expensive and/or aggressive than the current standard of care," concludes co-lead author Alyson Haslam, Ph.D., also at the OHSU Knight Cancer Institute.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
I’ve never had a shot of tequila and I don’t eat at Taco Bell
Viruses can activate bacterial infections at the site of the viral damage. Pneumonia can be an example of this effect. Certain cardiac problems can be another.
The antibiotic won't help with the virus, but it may curb the secondary bacterial infections. This is a life-saver for vulnerable patients.
Antibiotics are not going to help with a common cold or the flu.
Not anymore. Furthermore, doctors are conditioned to believe that (and therefore treat) the customers will be noncompliant patients, who will not return therefore, it’s best to load them up with a battery of shots, tests, rx’s, etc.
First time I got the flu shot, I got the flu.
Last 2 years I took high dose vitamin D (10,000 IU/day) through flu season. The office employees were dropping like flies, I did fine.
Read some studies out of Japan about high dose D and viral infectious disease resistant. So far so good. Maybe I just got lucky. (never, ever had before!!)
It’s all CYA.
butter is bad for you - everyone should swap to margarine.
oh wait, that was decades ago
People are examined, diagnosed and treated according to probability. If this were not true, before you are prescribed any antibiotic, there would be a two-week gap between your doctors visit and the prescription being issued, in order for the bacteria to be identified.
Only way to get the bad humours out of the system.
You could save even more money skipping the Tamiflu. It’s barely more than a placebo.
It still runs its course, but you feel incredibly better while infected!
Everybody is different, and what might be effective for one person might not for another. That is the fact that gets lost in these “studies”. For example, Losartan does not work for me for HBP - has no effect at all. Several of the other “sartans” work just fine though - currently using Telmisartan and BP is well under control. Yet Losartan is often the doctor’s first choice.
Yes, no matter what, we all eventually die.
I believe the thinking on colonoscopies has also changed in recent times. There’s a simple test for blood in the stool that can show if further testing, like a colonoscopy, is recommended. Colonoscopies, while routine, can be dangerous, especially in older patients. Nothing like a perforated bowel to mess up your week.
Then please don’t EVER go to one. Set your own bones. Take out your own appendix
> Yes, no matter what, we all eventually die.
Not sure where I head it, but I love the quote: The bleeding will eventually stop. One way or another.
Boy, no kidding. We have the Police Hate and the Doctor Hate crowds on here that congregate.
Some people have an issue and they go on the Internet to get information on their own, and end up digesting information from people who feel exactly as they do. A self-licking ice cream cone.
I am glad for people who are 70 years old and haven’t had to go to a doctor in their entire life, but I take issue with them saying anyone who goes to a doctor is a fool.
You have a good point on flu shots and their value. I was ‘forced’ (military requirement) for 22 years to take the flu shot yearly. I probably had the flu on 18 occasions in that period (usually the mild 24-to-48 version). Once I retired, and it’s been almost 20 years now...I avoided the flu shot entirely. I’ve had the 24-hour bug maybe two times in that twenty-year period. So I just don’t buy into the shot being of value.
Interesting. I was reviewing my med records recently (on a phone app!) and saw my 5yr colonoscopy had been pushed out 7-8 years. I was gonna ask the doc about it on my next visit. Thanks!
Wait...what are the reversals when it comes to cardio vascular disease?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.