Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Where Is the Evidence? Best Practice in Spine Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Surgery of the Spine and Spinal Cord

  • 2078 Accesses

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is gaining importance in our current health-care landscape. However, the concept of EBM risks to become a victim of its own success if all parties involved are not clear on what EBM really is, why and how EBM should (not) be practiced, and have sufficient skills to distinguish methodologically sound papers from biased opinion papers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O’Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schunemann HJ, Edejer T, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fouque D, Laville M, Haugh M, Boissel JP (1996) Systematic reviews and their roles in promoting evidence-based medicine in renal disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant: Off Publ Eur Dial Trans Assoc Eur Renal Assoc 11:2398–2401

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312:71–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Travers J, Marsh S, Williams M, Weatherall M, Caldwell B, Shirtcliffe P, Aldington S, Beasley R (2007) External validity of randomised controlled trials in asthma: to whom do the results of the trials apply? Thorax 62:219–223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. http://www.thecochranelibrary.com. Accessed Date Accessed

  6. webpage E. http://www.european-renal-best-practice.org. Accessed Date Accessed

  7. Nagler E (2013) ERBP Guideline development methodology: towards the best possible guidelines. Nephrol Dial Transplant: Off Publ Eur Dial Trans Assoc Eur Renal Assoc

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rosenbaum SE, Glenton C, Nylund HK, Oxman AD (2010) User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful summary of findings tables for cochrane reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 63:607–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N (2014) Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 348:g3725

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Shea BJ, Bouter LM, Peterson J, Boers M, Andersson N, Ortiz Z, Ramsay T, Bai A, Shukla VK, Grimshaw JM (2007) External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS One 2:e1350

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Bogdan-Lovis E, Fleck L, Barry HC (2012) ’It’s NOT FAIR! Or is it? The promise and the tyranny of evidence-based performance assessment. Theor Med Bioeth 33:293–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Uhlig K, Macleod A, Craig J, Lau J, Levey AS, Levin A, Moist L, Steinberg E, Walker R, Wanner C, Lameire N, Eknoyan G (2006) Grading evidence and recommendations for clinical practice guidelines in nephrology. A position statement from Kidney Disease: improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int 70:2058–2065

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tangri N, Tighiouart H, Meyer KB, Miskulin DC (2011) Both patient and facility contribute to achieving the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ pay-for-performance target for dialysis adequacy. J Am Soc Nephrol: JASN 22:2296–2302

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kiefe CI, Allison JJ, Williams OD, Person SD, Weaver MT, Weissman NW (2001) Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285:2871–2879

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Howard AD, Howard RS, Goldstein SL, Meyer KB (2012) Fistula first breakthrough initiative (FFBI): lessons about arteriovenous fistula prevalence goals. Am J Kidney Dis: Off J Natl Kidney Found

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kotter T, Blozik E, Scherer M (2012) Methods for the guideline-based development of quality indicators – a systematic review. Implement Sci: IS 7:21

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Sugarman JR, Frederick PR, Frankenfield DL, Owen WF Jr, McClellan WM (2003) Developing clinical performance measures based on the dialysis outcomes quality initiative clinical practice guidelines: process, outcomes, and implications. Am J Kidney Dis: Off J Natl Kidney Found 42:806–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. http://ohg.cochrane.org/sites/ohg.cochrane.org/files/uploads/Riskof bias assessment tool.pdf. Accessed Date Accessed

  19. Coyne DW (2007) Practice recommendations based on low, very low, and missing evidence. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol: CJASN 2:11–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Snowdon C, Elbourne DR, Garcia J, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Francis D, Grant AM, Knight RC, McDonald AM, Roberts I (2006) Financial considerations in the conduct of multi-centre randomised controlled trials: evidence from a qualitative study. Trials 7:34

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. van der Veer SN, Tomson CR, Jager KJ. Van Biesen W. Bridging the gap between what we know and what we do in renal medicine: improving the implementability of the European Renal Best Practice guidelines. Nephrol Dial Transplant: Off Publ Eur Dial Transplant Assoc Eur Renal Assoc

    Google Scholar 

  22. Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Gray JM, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH (1996) Transferring evidence from research into practice: 1. The role of clinical care research evidence in clinical decisions. ACP J Club 125:A14–A16

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Crump RT (2013) Decision support for patients: values clarification and preference elicitation. Med Care Res Rev: MCRR 70:50S–79S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Smith QW, Street RL Jr, Volk RJ, Fordis M (2013) Differing levels of clinical evidence: exploring communication challenges in shared decision making. Med Care Res Rev: MCRR 70:3S–13S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH (2011) GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64:401–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Stanovich KE, West RF (2008) On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. J Pers Soc Psychol 94:672–695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rabin W (2000) Risk aversion and expected utility theory: a calibration theorem. Econometrica 68:1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Herrington WG, Levy JB (2008) Metformin: effective and safe in renal disease? Int Urol Nephrol 40:411–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Renal Division, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

    Wim Van Biesen MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Wim Van Biesen MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wim Van Biesen MD, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Neurosurgery, AZ Nikolaas, Sint-Niklaas, Belgium

    Erik van de Kelft

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Van Biesen, W. (2016). Where Is the Evidence? Best Practice in Spine Surgery. In: van de Kelft, E. (eds) Surgery of the Spine and Spinal Cord. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27613-7_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27613-7_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27611-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27613-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation