When does research become evidence based practice?

When does published research become evidence based practice? As a researcher, and huge fan of peer review publication, I came across the attached publication below. It’s a 2023 publication on Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter (ONSD) to measure raised ICP. I was interested as I published a very similar paper in the Emergency Medical Journal in 2011: https://lnkd.in/evne-52y After many debates, across many research themes, when can we stop researching something and accept it as ‘evidence based’? What level of evidence do you feel comfortable accepting to adopt into your daily practice? This is has been an often debated topic in OHCA resuscitation science, where advanced life support guidelines/international consensus can be years behind research, or expect a level of evidence quality which is unachievable (particualrly regarding pre-hospital OHCA). ECMO/ECLS is a good example where the basic science is undeniable but adoption understandably slow, due to cost and implementation challenges (although ‘lack of evidence’ is often cited as a reason for delay rather than honesty about the sizeable logistical and cost challenges which make it an intervention only for richer healthcare systems and area codes). I think the ONSD question has been thoroughly answered. It does correlate with ICP. Does it correlate with neurosurgical intervention, independent of CT result, is another question, which I suspect the answer to is no. How many observational studies, what level of evidence, what questions need answering for you to adopt research into practice without a NICE guidline or international consensus statement to ‘give you top cover’?

  • graphical user interface, text

I remember looking at this when working in a neuro critical care - maybe all we’re missing is some NICE recommendations

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories