Notice: register_sidebar was called incorrectly. No id was set in the arguments array for the "Sidebar" sidebar. Defaulting to "sidebar-1". Manually set the id to "sidebar-1" to silence this notice and keep existing sidebar content. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 4.2.0.) in /data/30/1/121/80/1121895/user/1185656/htdocs/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3622

Notice: add_custom_image_header is deprecated since version 3.4! Use add_theme_support( 'custom-header', $args ) instead. in /data/30/1/121/80/1121895/user/1185656/htdocs/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3406

Notice: The called constructor method for WP_Widget is deprecated since version 4.3.0! Use
instead. in /data/30/1/121/80/1121895/user/1185656/htdocs/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3457 » NEJM letter casts doubt on original Gawande checklist paper

NEJM letter casts doubt on original Gawande checklist paper

June 11, 2014- By Steven E. Greer, MD

When the recent Canadian studied published in the NEJM failed to show any benefit from the WHO surgical checklist championed by Atul Gawande, The Healthcare Channel pointed out that the original Gawande paper was possibly the problem. It was designed poorly, and collected data from non-U.S. countries with little oversight.

Now, in the current online NEJM, letters to the editor are coming in. One writer echoes our concerns about the original Gawande paper.

To the Editor:

The lack of benefit with implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist in Ontario warrants sober reflection. Many highly publicized efficacy studies have shown improved outcomes with simple interventions, and standard-of-care procedures are often changed on the basis of rapid implementation of their findings. However, attempts to replicate studies often fail or find opposite results.1

This is unsurprising considering the impetus to publish positive results, publication bias in peer-reviewed journals, and statistical explanations for overoptimistic and false findings.2 The revision of evidence that has been embraced has the potential to promote cynicism among clinicians and within society.

Pointing out limitations of initial findings should be the responsibility of unbiased editorials. Although Leape’s editorial mentions the limitations of the Ontario study, it does not address whether the trial that popularized the WHO checklist3 might have shown inflated attributable benefit.

When an intervention has already been implemented and its effectiveness is subsequently challenged, policy reversal and de-implementation might be indicated.

In view of the potential harm of premature implementation, independent replication should be required before new evidence is implemented.

Michael S. Avidan, M.B., B.Ch.
Alex S. Evers, M.D.
Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO


Atul Gawande’s surgical checklist fails in real world study

Questionable comments by Atul Gawande after the Boston Marathon bombings


No Comments

No comments yet.

Notice: comments_rss_link is deprecated since version 2.5! Use post_comments_feed_link() instead. in /data/30/1/121/80/1121895/user/1185656/htdocs/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3406
RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

WordPress Themes

hogan outlet calvin klein baratos calzoncillos calvin klein baratos calzoncillos calvin klein calzoncillos calvin klein ralph lauren canada cheap tiffany calzoncillos calvin klein baratos calvin klein baratos calzoncillos calvin klein calzoncillos calvin klein baratos calzoncillo Calvin Klein hogan outlet online hogan outlet outlet hogan sito ufficiale michael kors uk outlet