Login
Site Search
Subscribe
Modify
Home >
List Archives
The ATLS evidence argument
Ronald Gross Rgross at harthosp.orgFri Oct 13 12:09:30 BST 2006
- Previous message: The ATLS evidence argument
- Next message: The ATLS evidence argument
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Karim, I guess we really should have stopped yesterday. Mike, please contact Irvene Hughes at the ACS ATLS office (ihughes at facs.org). She has been with the ATLS program since its inception in 1980, and am certain that she will have all of the data that you wish to see re: the effectiveness of that course in improving patient care. Then perhaps you could share that information with all who want to see the evidence (but only if you want to....), and either refute those with the "double standard" or publically admit that those "dogmatic beliefs" just might have been supported by statistics and a well-designed program that was, and continues to be scrutinized, analyzed, and redone by some pretty good educators over the last 26 years. No one has ever said that ATLS has provided us with the one and only correct way to take care of the trauma patient, and, as previously pointed out, the course text specifically states that. What it does do is provide all who take it with a BASIC understanding of the disease we call trauma, and provides us with a guide as to how to approach the trauma patient when they present to your shop. The course provides, simply speaking, a "common language" with some common goals of therapy that are common to all patients who are injured and need care. Simple concept, simple goal, huge results. (sorry for the opinionated conclusion at the end of that sentence.....I just couldn't resist!! :-) Best to all, Ron Gotta go for a while - actually gonna venture into the OR (if I can find it....) WOW, what a great day! >>> "Mike" <mmackinnon at cox.net> 10/12/2006 10:07 PM >>> To all I have to admit im quite disappointed by the reaction to Dr Paul Bailey's query for evidence. Over the 7 years ive been apart of this list, Ive seen over and over many people "challenge" for evidence of a practitioners opinion or assumptions. Not only has this made me a better provider, but has caused me to become involved in research as well as publication. Evidence based medicine/practice is the goal we all strive for. To see many of those who have traditionally challenged for evidence all of a sudden propagate dogmatic beliefs in response, is disheartening. It suggest that there is clearly a double standard which should not exist. Based on the discussions over the years, the general consensus is that there is nothing that "just makes sense" or is "self evident" in the realm of evidence based medicine. Odd to read those very things said now by those who have scorned others in the past. Essentially. Prove it or don't do it, as Dr Mattox says. -- trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG To change your settings or unsubscribe visit: http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
- Previous message: The ATLS evidence argument
- Next message: The ATLS evidence argument
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the trauma-list mailing list
