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 didn’t plumb it for specifics, but there’s apparently a lot of incorrect ‘common knowledge’ our doctors now have. “ <<
Like almost everything they practice!
.
Well STOP SHARING the Communion Cups !
you never saw a family member screaming at the doctor to DO SOMETHING for their 86 yro mother who isn't eating like she used to..
lets all be honest.....we go to the doctor and we expect them to DO SOMETHING like write a prescription......
lets not put all the blame on the docs...
re tamiflu....a doc a work said that tamiflu MAYBE might shorten your flu by 24 hrs.....that's it....its a big pharma drug push and now everybody expects to get it prescribed.....
One example was On pump versus Off pump bypass surgery, is there anyone in the US recommending Off pump bypass surgery? I don't think so.
Another example was antidepressants for depression in Alzheimers. A study says there isn't statistical difference with placebo. But the negating study was done on something like 200 or 300 patients. I don't think that's enough numbers to trash the practice. I would also want to know more about secondary outcomes like perceptions of caregivers, sleep schedule, etc.
Finally the other example that sticks in my mind was the medication for sleep problems (ambien) versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Will your insurance pay for the CBT? Does your lifestyle permit you the time to see the CBT through? CBT is basically changing your thinking about a problem so you stop worrying about it and learn to manage it in other ways. Just because CBT is better statistically doesn't mean it fits every patient. So you're not going to stop prescribing ambien just because of this study and if you prescribe ambien, it doesn't mean you are a bad Doctor doing useless things. It means you have talked to your patient and decided that Ambien is an appropriate medication to try.
another hogwash “study”
one of the few concrete examples cited was:
“Other low-value but costly medical practices adopted by patients themselves include ... acupuncture”
acupuncture isn’t costly and it’s worked miracles for me personally for certain situations ..
The 70 yr old you describe is most likely overweight , diabetic, smokes, has COPD, and wonders why they don’t feel good. No doubt they’ll go to the ever reliable interwebs and find some “natural” cure
Saying that docs tend to do rely on their experience and routine so newer treatments or understanding is out there is kind of a no brainer
Yep - the only question is whether we’re gonna be in the crowd that precedes, or succeeds, the melting of the last glacier...
We don't, but the handshake chorus ......
My wife always carries hand sanitizer, and I use it, but I guess some bugs laugh at sanitizer.
24-48 hours is not the flu.
The swab isn't for typing, it's to prove you have it.
Studies have shown over and over that up to 40% of patients with "influenza like illness" are actually infected with other viruses, principally parainfluenza, RSV, and strains of coronavirus.
Tamiflu has no activity against any of those viruses, so prescribing Tamiflu because someone has "all the symptoms" brings those people side effects and costs with no possible benefit.
The whole problem with these "ineffective" practices based on big data is that they do work some of the time. We don't know enough about human biology or individual variation to predict, accurately, in whom they will work and in whom they won't.
"Life is short, the Art is long
The occasion fleeting
Experiment dangerous
And decision difficult"
That's as true as when Hippocrates wrote in 2400 years ago,
Alternative medicine is nearly pure B.S.
Mainstream medicine has been corrupted by money.
Best advise: eat less, do more.
Tamiflu doesn’t have any appreciable side effects and if the flu is going through an area, there’s no reason to lay to type obvious symptoms.
So it won’t make you feel any worse than your i creasing symptoms already do.
Thanks for that clarification.
70, never gotten a flu shot...
You apparently have a strong immune system and are able to fight off the flues that you pick up in church. That’s good—lucky for you. But what about those that you infect while you’re sick?
Flu shots aren’t perfect and besides, most people overcome the flu just fine. Unfortunately, that’s not true for everyone in your church or community. You don’t get the shot for yourself, but rather to help those around you with less strong or compromised immune systems like infants, the elderly or perhaps those in chemo trying to recover from cancer.
You’ll live with or without a shot but if you get one you’re less likely to get sick and pass it on to someone who might die from a flu.
Is there anyone in your family, church or community who might be at risk if they get the flu? If so, get a shot for them.
Why, thus could be the start of a whole new thread, focusing on one of my pet peeves.
“And now, will all of you in the congregation please shake hands with or hug every disease-infested stranger you can find...”
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.