This week's Thursday Thoughts was inspired by a guest to my blog last week. He's one of those EBP types (P standing for police).
The discussion was cordial, better than most of the argumentative types online these days, but the tone was definitely there. Posts like those always confuse me, when someone relies only on "evidence" are they talking about 1 RCT with a control group? Or do they need the RCT also to be validated?. Better yet, are they looking for a large sample with long term follow up, or a meta-analysis?
Do you need all that for a clinical pearl? I sure don't. If someone showed me a novel technique that made something I was using regularly better, or more comfortable for a patient, I'd be all over it. I certainly wouldn't accuse someone of wasting the patient's time, or instructing something that could hurt a patient. Any technique can waste a patient's time or hurt them, but it's up to the clinician, their expertise and clinical decision making to see if it is indicated. I think some people just like to be heard. A little googling is all it takes to know that some people belong to a forum that loves to debate and argue. That's alright for some, but not for me! Thoughts?
Either way, I'm happy to post Clinical Pearls for the thousands of you that find them useful, and not for the select few that think I am wasting a patient's time. Thanks for reading!
Keeping it Eclectic...