• F Eitel, E A M Neugebauer, and W E Mutschler.
• Chirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Innenstadt, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.
• Unfallchirurg. 2002 Aug 1; 105 (8): 666-74.

AbstractIt is wise for surgeons to critically analyze their decision making, to add evidence in addition to the normal approaches, i.e. expert opinion and pathophysiological rationale. What evidence, is how it works, how often it is used in orthopedic surgery are the main topics of this article, as well as problems and limits to evidence-based medicine (EbM). EbM operates in five steps: 1. formulate an answerable question with respect to the patient's problems; 2. search the relevant literature; 3. critically appraise the assembled information through evidence based standards; 4. implement these evidence supported findings in your daily practice; 5. evaluate your evidence-based practice. When one builds decisions upon evidence the following effects become apparent: rational choice of possible, alternative decisions, reduction of diagnostic and therapeutic risks, improvements in medical education and efficient delivery of health care. A literature search reveals few evidence-based investigations published in orthopedic surgery. Lastly, we discuss limitations of EbM, showing that both misunderstanding about EbM and technical problems contribute to mistrust in EbM. These may include problems with population heterogeneity, standardization of surgical procedures, conducting random studies, the lack of statistical power and often "publication bias". Overcoming present problems with EbM by further ("evidence-based") research should lead to better understanding of the evidence paradigm and eventually modify this approach. The literature already demonstrates that EbM attains its goal. A valid judgment of EbM will result if one evaluates one's own evidence-based practices. The implementation of EbM is also a matter of policy.

15 keywords...

hide…