抑郁症治疗的循证医学研究进展

循证医学是近年来国际上临床医学领域迅速发展起来的新学科,已成为当前国际医学研究中的热点之一,是指对病人的诊 断、治疗、预防、康复和其他决策应建立在当前最佳临床研究证据,是遵循证据的临床医学,强调收集最佳证据。其理念的科学性 和有效性迅速渗透到医学领域的众多学科,循证精神卫生也相继提出并发展。抑郁症是由各种原因引起的以抑郁为主要症状的 一组心境障碍或情感性障碍,近几年能够有效运用循证医学方法为治疗抑郁症寻找最佳临床证据,制定循证诊疗指南成为了临 床医生的迫切要求。本文就抑郁症治疗方面的循证医学研究进展做一综述。     

康复医学本科教育增加循证医学内容的必要性及教学体会

目的:探讨康复医学本科教育增加循证医学内容的必要性。方法:将我校95名11-12级临床医学本科班选修康复医学专业学生随机分为对照组与观察组,对照组采取传统教学模式,观察组采取循证医学模式。对两组学生的教学效果进行评价。结果:对照组学生对病因学、诊断性试验、治疗性试验、药物不良反应、病情预后、临床经济学、卫生技术评估及临床决策分析等知识的掌握度均显著低于观察组(P0.05);对照组学生的案例测验得分、临床技能考核成绩及学生问卷评分均显著低于观察组(P0.05);对照组中咨询老师及高年资医生、阅读相关杂志及3周内检索过MEDLINE的学生的比率均显著低于观察组(P0.05)。结论:循证医学教学模式的教学效果显著优于传统教学模式,应加以推广。     

临床循证实践面临的困难与对策

进20年来,循证医学获得长足发展,然而临床循证实践与循证医学两者之间还存在巨大的鸿沟,医师临床循证实践的开展情况仍受到各种因素的制约。文章从科学证据、医护人员、患者、组织和卫生系统等五个方面对科学证据转化为循证实践面临的困难进行了系统回顾,并从临床循证实践指南开发、医学教育、信息化建设、医疗机构管理和加强卫生系统的作用等角度提出了促进循证实践开展的建议。

     

神经修复学临床细胞治疗进展

细胞治疗作为21世纪新的临床医疗技术已成为当今研究热点,本刊4年前发文《神经修复临床细胞治疗现状与展望》,重点介绍神经修复治疗的细胞分类、概念梳理和误用纠正、临床应用探索和法律法规;旨在推动神经修复临床细胞治疗健康、有序和规范发展。近年这一领域又完成了不少临床研究,尤其是多中心、双盲(或观察者盲)、安慰剂和随机临床试验。遗憾的是,曾报道有效的细胞治疗(包括干细胞衍生细胞)多数不能被高循证医学证据水平临床试验证实,这一残酷现实结果与学术界、患者、政府管理层和企业投资者预期值相差甚远。因此并非所有细胞对任何神经系统疾病及不同时间窗都有临床治疗价值,实践是检验真理的唯一标准,作为新的临床医疗技术需要随机双盲高循证医学证据证实。本文重点介绍高等级循证医学证据结果,分析临床试验失败原因。已被高循证医学证据证实有效的神经修复细胞治疗是现阶段这一领域重要成果,应深化探索和加快其临床转化,使其真正成为现代医学临床医疗技术,满足人类神经退变、损伤和修复及延年益寿期望。本刊秉承“实事求是”的原则,坚守“开放、客观、公正”的立场,鼓励各位专家学者以客观数据和资料为依据,总结甄别已完成的相关研究治疗结果,调整并确保本领域创新能沿着正确路线探索,以更好更快地促进细胞治疗成为临床落地实用技术,为人类提供更多的健康服务。     

循证医学对提高干部医疗保健水平的意义和作用

循证医学在近20年得到了迅速发展。应用循证医学的理念和方法,指导干部医疗保健工作,有利于医务人员在疾病诊断、治疗方面作出最佳选择,有利于医务人员水平提高,有利于医患之间沟通,有助于提高干部医疗保健的医疗质量及卫生资源利用。干部保健管理部门也可以进行循证决策,制定合适的体检项目、符合干部保健特点的诊疗规范,对保健人群进行循证管理。     

循证医学在预防肛肠手术后排尿障碍中的应用效果分析

目的探讨循证护理在预防肛肠术后排尿障碍中的应用效果。方法选取2013年4月~2015年4月我院收治行肛肠手术患者86例,按护理措施不同分为对照组42例和观察组44例,对照组42例患者实施常规临床护理,观察组给予循证护理干预,观察两组患者术后肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门排气及排便时间、住院时间及排尿障碍改善情况。结果实施循证护理干预后,观察组的肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门排气及排便时间、住院时间均优于对照组(P0.05),而且治疗后排尿障碍恢复有效率优于对照组(P0.05)。结论循证医学护理在肛肠术后患者的应用效果显著,能缩短治疗时间,提高治疗的有效性,值得临床推广应用。     

调脂在冠心病预防中的作用研究进展

冠心病(CHD)受多种危险因素影响,其中血脂异常是重要因素之一。大量循证医学证据显示,CHD防治中调脂治疗可降低心血管疾病发病率和病死率。他汀类药物降低LDL水平则是治疗的首要目标。既往研究证实,对中到高危CHD患者,他汀类治疗获益较大,而低危患者获益较小。     

我国本科护理专业开设循证医学课程的现状

循证医学是二十一世纪医学实践的新模式,是指导临床医生和医学生进行科学医疗实践的一种工具,又是实现临床医生终生自我教育的一种好的方法。循证医学的理念和方法对护理专业的影响,必将促进护理向科学化护理迈进,而循证医学教育是促进护理人员掌握循证医学知识和技能的关键,本文重点论述了我国本科护理专业开设循证医学课程的现状以及存在的主要问题。     

循证医学在急诊住院医师培训中的应用

循证医学（Evidense—based medicine,EBM）是一门新兴临床学科,著名流行病学专家David Sackett教授将循证医学定义为：慎重、准确和明智地应用能获得的最好研究依据来确定患者的治疗措施。其实质就是医生诊治患者的一个过程,是精益求精地认识疾病的本质,从而去寻求最佳证据,并联系的实际情况,取得最佳治疗效果。循征医学的3个基本要素是临床医生的个人专业技能、最好的科学证据、患者的价值和愿望。     

试论循证医院管理的实现途径及影响因素

?????? 循证医院管理是当前在循证医学背景下医院管理中的一种新思维、新理念。循证医学实践的五个步骤决定了循证医院管理的五个实现途径,然而在目前国内环境下,循证医院管理存在一些固有的约束或不足。因此,循证医院管理如需获得期望的效果,必须在实现途径上做好安排,同时密切关注重要的影响因素。     

Gezamenlijke besluitvorming zorgt voor een betere toepassing van evidence-based medicine in de geriatrische patiënt

Evidence based medicine (EBM) is the integration of the best research evidence, clinical expertise and patient values in the decision making process for patient care. However, elderly people are often excluded from participating in scientific studies and they often have multiple morbidities, which complicates the application of EBM. Shared decision making (SDM), a process where clinicians and patients share the best available evidence when faced with the task of making decisions, and where patients are supported to consider options, to achieve appropriate treatment can help to shape EBM for this group of patients.In this article, we provide tools for finding relevant literature for the geriatric patient population and for shaping the SDM process to achieve personalized care.     

The Spatialisation of Disease: Foucualt and Evidence-based Medicine (EBM)

In this paper I draw on the French philosopher Michel Foucault for a viewpoint on aspects of EBM. This means that I develop his idea of the spaces occupied by disease. I give much of the paper to only one of these spaces, the space of perception of disease, in order to major on the medical gaze, one of Foucault’s best-known contributions to the philosophy of medicine. As I explain what I mean by each of the spaces of disease, I configure EBM into this space. The conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. Evidence-based clinical practice requires integration of individual clinical expertise and patient preferences with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research and consideration of available resources. EBM can be considered a subcategory of evidence-based healthcare, which also includes other branches of health-care practice such as evidence-based nursing or evidence-based physiotherapy. EBM subcategories include evidence-based surgery and evidence-based cardiology (Guyatt et al. 2008, 783).     

Evidence-based alternative medicine?

The validity of evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the subject of ongoing controversy. The EBM movement has proposed a "hierarchy of evidence," according to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs provide the most reliable evidence concerning the efficacy of medical interventions. The evaluation of alternative medicine therapies highlights problems with the EBM hierarchy. Alternative medical researchers-like those in mainstream medicine-wish to evaluate their therapies using methods that are rigorous and that are consistent with their philosophies of medicine and healing. These investigators have three ways to relate their work to EBM. They can accept the EBM hierarchy and carry out RCTs when possible; they can accept the EBM standards but argue that the special characteristics of alternative medicine warrant the acceptance of "lower" forms of evidence; or they can challenge the EBM approach and work to develop new research designs and new standards of evidence that reflect their approach to medical care. For several reasons, this last option is preferable. First, it will best meet the needs of alternative medicine practitioners. Moreover, because similar problems beset the evaluation of mainstream medical therapies, reevaluation of standards of evidence will benefit everyone in the medical community--including, most importantly, patients.     

From hierarchy to network: a richer view of evidence for evidence-based medicine

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) advocates the improvement of patient care through the use of current best research evidence in medical decision making. In practice, "best evidence" generally refers to where a study fits on a hierarchy of evidence, which places randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other population-level research above laboratory research. Because population research is concerned primarily with average results obtained from large groups of people, ranking evidence on the basis of its place in the hierarchy is shortsighted and ultimately limits the ability of research results to inform the care of individual patients. The history and methodology of epidemiology reveals a close relationship between population-level and laboratory research; both types of research are necessary if we are to understand the causes of a disease. What EBM does not take into account in its hierarchy of evidence is that the same thing is true for research on the safety and efficacy of medical interventions. To maximize the information that clinical research can provide for clinical care, RCTs should be designed to elucidate within-group variability. This can only be done if the hierarchy of evidence is replaced by a network that takes into account the relationship between epidemiological and laboratory research.     

Research Trends in Evidence-Based Medicine: A Joinpoint Regression Analysis of More than 50 Years of Publication Data

Background

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) has developed as the dominant paradigm of assessment of evidence that is used in clinical practice. Since its development, EBM has been applied to integrate the best available research into diagnosis and treatment with the purpose of improving patient care. In the EBM era, a hierarchy of evidence has been proposed, including various types of research methods, such as meta-analysis (MA), systematic review (SRV), randomized controlled trial (RCT), case report (CR), practice guideline (PGL), and so on. Although there are numerous studies examining the impact and importance of specific cases of EBM in clinical practice, there is a lack of research quantitatively measuring publication trends in the growth and development of EBM. Therefore, a bibliometric analysis was constructed to determine the scientific productivity of EBM research over decades.

Methods

NCBI PubMed database was used to search, retrieve and classify publications according to research method and year of publication. Joinpoint regression analysis was undertaken to analyze trends in research productivity and the prevalence of individual research methods.

Findings

Analysis indicates that MA and SRV, which are classified as the highest ranking of evidence in the EBM, accounted for a relatively small but auspicious number of publications. For most research methods, the annual percent change (APC) indicates a consistent increase in publication frequency. MA, SRV and RCT show the highest rate of publication growth in the past twenty years. Only controlled clinical trials (CCT) shows a non-significant reduction in publications over the past ten years.

Conclusions

Higher quality research methods, such as MA, SRV and RCT, are showing continuous publication growth, which suggests an acknowledgement of the value of these methods. This study provides the first quantitative assessment of research method publication trends in EBM.     

Looking for rules in a world of exceptions: reflections on evidence-based practice

After more than a decade, evidence-based medicine (EBM) is well established as an important influence in health care. EBM has engendered a wide range of responses from near-evangelical fervor to angered rejection, with supporters convinced of its scientific superiority and detractors of its needless reductionism. EBM is not a philosophical doctrine, and its originators and proponents have, for the most part, ignored critics and foresworn theorizing. However, EBM claims to be a normative guide to being a better physician. The theoretical, practical, and philosophical dimensions of EBM are intimately intertwined. This essay is a sustained reflection on the issues raised by EBM as experienced by a clinician/teacher who has tried to apply the tenets of EBM in clinical care and teaching over the past decade, and who has sought to expand the borders of EBM from a philosophical point of view.     

On-the-Job Evidence-Based Medicine Training for Clinician-Scientists of the Next Generation

Clinical scientists are at the unique interface between laboratory science and frontline clinical practice for supporting clinical partnerships for evidence-based practice. In an era of molecular diagnostics and personalised medicine, evidence-based laboratory practice (EBLP) is also crucial in aiding clinical scientists to keep up-to-date with this expanding knowledge base. However, there are recognised barriers to the implementation of EBLP and its training. The aim of this review is to provide a practical summary of potential strategies for training clinician-scientists of the next generation.Current evidence suggests that clinically integrated evidence-based medicine (EBM) training is effective. Tailored e-learning EBM packages and evidence-based journal clubs have been shown to improve knowledge and skills of EBM. Moreover, e-learning is no longer restricted to computer-assisted learning packages. For example, social media platforms such as Twitter have been used to complement existing journal clubs and provide additional post-publication appraisal information for journals.In addition, the delivery of an EBLP curriculum has influence on its success. Although e-learning of EBM skills is effective, having EBM trained teachers available locally promotes the implementation of EBM training. Training courses, such as Training the Trainers, are now available to help trainers identify and make use of EBM training opportunities in clinical practice. On the other hand, peer-assisted learning and trainee-led support networks can strengthen self-directed learning of EBM and research participation among clinical scientists in training. Finally, we emphasise the need to evaluate any EBLP training programme using validated assessment tools to help identify the most crucial ingredients of effective EBLP training.In summary, we recommend on-the-job training of EBM with additional focus on overcoming barriers to its implementation. In addition, future studies evaluating the effectiveness of EBM training should use validated outcome tools, endeavour to achieve adequate power and consider the effects of EBM training on learning environment and patient outcomes.     

Beyond EBM: new directions for evidence-based public health

Public health researchers, policy makers, and practitioners agree that health is the outcome of interactions between biological, behavioral, and social determinants. Nonetheless, institutional patterns of research funding and practice remain obstacles to generating research at and between each of these levels. These practices are embedded in historic assumptions about the nature of reality and how it can best be understood. Current debates over the criteria for evaluating public health research have centered on the applicability of the clinical evidence-based medicine (EBM) model to the field of public health. The EBM hierarchy, which is based on traditional scientific assumptions about causality, is insufficient and potentially harmful as the basis for evaluating research on the determinants of health. Yet those who have put forward a critique of EBM have failed to develop a plausible alternative. Critical realism, based on the philosophy of Roy Bhaskar, may provide a way out of the current stalemate, enabling public health researchers from various disciplines and research paradigms to work together, bringing the full weight of scientific knowledge to bear on increasingly complex and global public health problems.     

Ethics and evidence-based medicine: is there a conflict?

This article addresses the advantages, disadvantages, and traps to which evidence-based medicine (EBM) may lead and suggests that, to be ethically valid, EBM must be aimed at the patient's best interests and not at the financial interests of others. While financial considerations are by no means trivial, it is hypocritical - if not dangerous - to hide them behind words like "evidence" or "quality."     

The Evidence Based Medicine approach to diagnostic testing: practicalities and limitations

Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has become a popular approach to medical decision making and is increasingly part of undergraduate and postgraduate medical education. EBM follows four steps: 1. formulate a clear clinical question from a patient's problem; 2. search the literature for relevant clinical articles; 3. evaluate (critically appraise) the evidence for its validity and usefulness; 4. implement useful findings into clinical practice. This review describes the concepts, terminology and skills taught to attendees at EBM courses, focusing specifically on the approach taken to diagnostic questions. It covers how to ask an answerable clinical question, search for evidence, construct diagnostic critically appraised topics (CATs), and use sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, kappa and phi statistics. It familiarises readers with the lexicon and techniques of EBM and allows better understanding of the needs of EBM practitioners.