article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"

• Previous message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
• Next message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Paul

Good points.

I find it exceedingly interesting how the expectation of evidence by wisened list members changes when they (or their profession) is being questioned.

>From my perspective, it is the responsibility of the trauma surgeons to PROVE their claim about patient outcomes when they are present. It would appear international evidence is not in agreement (outcomes similar without or with). How is the the ER physicians responsibility to prove of disprove anything? 

As i remember, there have been many condemnations of needle thoracentesis ( a long standing tx )on this list due to lack of evidence. When it has been suggested that clinically, it seems to make sense and there is alot of qualatative evidence for it, people are instantly rebuked with "show me the evidence". Well, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Just because its been the norm in the USA to have trauma docs attend all trauma, that dosen't constitute evidence, just dogma.

where is your evidence?

• Previous message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
• Next message: article in the may issue of "Annals of Emergency Medicine"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]