Used under Fair Use doctrine
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is applying or translating research findings in our daily patient care practices and clinical decision-making.
https://accelerate.uofuhealth.utah.edu/explore/what-is-evidence-based-practice
We are in the midst of a national argument over COVID-19. The two main sides are that we need to continue stay-at-home policies and the other is that it is time to begin loosening those policies. There are some areas of agreement between the two. For instance, both sides agree that loosening the policies will result in an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. Both agree that continuing to keep the economy shut down will result in an economic downturn. Both sides agree that senior citizens and those with certain health conditions are more likely to die; their mortality rate is definitely higher than the average. Both sides agree that the young and healthy are significantly less likely to die. Both sides tend to agree that areas that have a “hot” infection rate going, such as New York City, will probably need to reopen more slowly.
What they disagree on is what this means. They disagree on how bad the increase will be. They disagree on whether the opening up will result in an unacceptable death rate and even on what an unacceptable death rate is. They disagree on whether the country can put up with further economic disruption. They disagree on what is an acceptable testing regimen before an area can slowly (or quickly) reopen.
A good example of a mild form of this disagreement can be seen on the TV screen between President Trump and Dr. Fauci. They remain teammates. They have apparently good relations one with another. Yet, they disagree. President Trump wants to open up now and Dr. Fauci wants to limit opening up to sections of the country that meet certain epidemiological goals. Another example is found between the Republican Governor of Ohio, Mike DeWine, and the Health Director Dr. Amy Acton, a Democrat. They have managed to be an example of working together without necessarily agreeing on the details.
Notice that I am deliberately skipping the conspiracy theorists. Frankly, they simply do not have the backing of the scientific, the health, the intelligence, and most Congresspeople. They also have no backing in the international community.
We are now about to enter into the phase of what will become evidence based practice. Parts of this country are choosing to open up faster than other parts. It will become possible to compare urban areas that opened up quickly with urban areas that did not. Rural areas will be able to have the same type of comparison performed. These comparisons will all be after the events mentioned. And, at the end of it, we will be able to answer the questions about who was closer to being correct in their estimates of the effects of COVID-19 policies. It may be that one side of the argument will be more correct than the other side. It may be that each side will have points on which they will have been correct and points on which they will not have been correct. In that case, the evidence might lead to an in-between set of conclusions.
I hope that at the end of this phase we will not regret the decisions we have made. I hope that we will not end up with an unacceptable number of deaths. But, one way or another, we are about to have our theories go from theories to evidence based conclusions.
Leave a Reply