Literature DB >> 25050576

Evidence-based assessment of well-established interventions: the parachute and the epidural hematoma.

Kyle S Nelson1, Ann M Brearley, Stephen J Haines.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The methods of evidence-based medicine are a relatively recent development in the understanding of clinical practice. They are criticized as not providing support for interventions long held to be highly effective based on experience that predated the availability of evidence-based analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the methods of evidence-based medicine can be successfully applied to interventions established before those methods were developed.
METHODS: Systematic review of English language literature on the natural history and treated prognosis of acute epidural hematoma and analysis of existing data on mortality associated with parachute use. DATA SOURCES: Sources of data included Medline, Old Medline, Science Citation Index, British and US Parachute Associations, and Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board databases (both of the United States). Also included were national databases reporting mortality and total number of parachute uses.
RESULTS: The estimated mortality of falling from an airplane with an ineffective parachute is 74% (69-79). Mortality associated with effective parachute deployment is between 0.0011% and 0.0017%. For acute epidural hematoma, estimated mortality is 98.54% (95.1-99.9) without treatment and 12.9% (10.5-15.3) with treatment. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 death for the parachute is estimated to be 1.35 (1.27-1.45) and for epidural hematoma 1.17 (1.13-1.22) (95% binomial confidence intervals in parentheses).
CONCLUSION: The methods of evidence-based medicine are robust and can deal with interventions of great face validity and those considered well established before such methods were well developed. We propose initial criteria for evaluating the quality of evidence supporting long-established interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25050576     DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  5 in total

1.  Most medical practices are not parachutes: a citation analysis of practices felt by biomedical authors to be analogous to parachutes.

Authors:  Michael J Hayes; Victoria Kaestner; Sham Mailankody; Vinay Prasad
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2018-01-15

2.  Does usage of a parachute in contrast to free fall prevent major trauma?: a prospective randomised-controlled trial in rag dolls.

Authors:  Patrick Czorlich; Till Burkhardt; Jan Hendrik Buhk; Jakob Matschke; Marc Dreimann; Nils Ole Schmidt; Sven Oliver Eicker
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Admission into a Nursing Home. Delay or prevention with the use of a complete support network?

Authors:  Ralf Ihl; Nadine Cujai; Katrin Krah
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 1.281

Review 4.  Neuroprotection in acute brain injury: an up-to-date review.

Authors:  Nino Stocchetti; Fabio S Taccone; Giuseppe Citerio; Paul E Pepe; Peter D Le Roux; Mauro Oddo; Kees H Polderman; Robert D Stevens; William Barsan; Andrew I R Maas; Geert Meyfroidt; Michael J Bell; Robert Silbergleit; Paul M Vespa; Alan I Faden; Raimund Helbok; Samuel Tisherman; Elisa R Zanier; Terence Valenzuela; Julia Wendon; David K Menon; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 9.097

5.  Towards the concept of disease-modifier in post-stroke or vascular cognitive impairment: a consensus report.

Authors:  Régis Bordet; Ralf Ihl; Amos D Korczyn; Giuseppe Lanza; Jelka Jansa; Robert Hoerr; Alla Guekht
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 8.775

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.