Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Webster, N. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Webster, N. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2001, Vol. 87, No. 3 377-379
© 2001 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Editorial

Editorial I

Evidence based practice in intensive care—light on the horizon?

N. R. Webster

The practice of intensive care medicine, although now on a much firmer footing, is nevertheless an emerging speciality. Foundations were laid in the 1950s, and although other countries were ahead, this at present multidisciplinary practice has only recently gained speciality recognition within the UK from the Specialist Training Authority (STA). It would have been expected that such a new speciality would have been entirely governed along the modern evidence based practice system. This, however, is not the case. It is perhaps the perception from those not working in intensive care that those practitioners who do are reluctant to be guided along evidence based medicine practice and critical care medicine is consequently lagging behind other areas of medical practice.

A recent Editorial in this journal on parenteral and immunonutrition1 along with the subsequent letters of rebuttal and a reply from the original authors,2 illustrates the concerns well. The conclusion is that . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Mechanical ventilation

Steroids in sepsis

Anti-TNF in sepsis

Activated protein C

Renal dose dopamine

Note added in proof

References


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
R. Bloomfield and D. W. Noble
Editorial III: Corticosteroids for septic shock--a standard of care?
Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2004; 93(2): 178 - 180.
[Full Text] [PDF]