|
tucker -> RE: The Parachute Study (January 26, 2008 1:38:18 AM)
|
BTW...This study was referenced in a letter to the editor in PT Magazine. Robert Latz wrote,
"Finally, in 2003, the BMJ published an article titled “Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.”3 The authors' finding was that there was no RCT to support the use of a parachute to prevent injury from jumping out of a plane. However, it just makes sense. In addition, it would be very difficult to perform an RCT to demonstrate that using a parachute was better than not using one when jumping out of a plane. This editorial was a subtle reminder of the idea stated above that EBP means using the “best available evidence” and applying this evidence to the person before us. It is a reminder that the “best available evidence” sometimes is not in published research articles. It is a reminder that in addition to swimming in the research that is available, we need to remain present with the person before us in the clinic. It is a reminder that we use what Frank Mallon in the June PT Magazine described as the “soul of practice….the clinical decision making of the practitioner.”
Article: Understand Evidence Based Practice, PT Magazine Sept 2007.
http://www.apta.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=42444
|
|
|
|