To Coin Some Phrases...

Let's take a break from catching you up to speed on where I'm at and how I got here and what I've learned type of stuff to talk about RESEARCH. A very important topic in medicine, discovering break throughs and what not. But lets talk about all the turds you have to sift through to find a perfect peanut.

As I read another long article about some studies about a specific problem only to finally reach the stunning conclusion of the tale, "more research in this area is indicated to guide practice," I sigh and mourn my precious lost minutes. Don't get me wrong, I understand that research and studies allow us to overall improve how we take care of patients. Awesome right? YES, but...

Begin sarcasm.

Definitions: mine of course, not to be mistaken for anything real

the Literature - collection of all the text published in medical and scientific journals. Often given the impression that it is a living, breathing, divine being who sits atop an ivory throne in Valhalla and judges doctors by their clinical decisions by comparing them to the available Literature. Most often used in a smug comment by a Journal Doc (see below).
     Example 1: "You don't know what dose of Flintstone's gummies to give a pregnant dwarf after she's suffered extensive light saber injuries? How about you search 'the Literature' and get back to me tomorrow."
     Example 2: "Well yes the patient obviously has a bruise on their buttocks, but what Elmo grade do you assign it? Oh you haven't heard of the Elmo grade on buttock bruises have you. I suggest you read "the Literature." There is a paper by the Cookie Monster that you should know by heart.

Google Image search result for the Norse God Odin who rules Valhalla and is probably Literature incarnate

You get the idea...

Journal Doc - attending physician who may come in any age or gender and gives the impression that they do absolutely NOTHING unless there is a randomized controlled trial or meta-analysis proving that it works and is safe. That is unless there is NO such data regarding the subject, then the attitude shifts to, "hell let's try this because I think it makes sense in my head." This person creates constant scenarios where one must defend every decision they make with an article that proved that it won't make the patient explode instantly. Also, when these folks are presented with an article that contradicts their practice, the typical response is, "well that isn't the standard of care here yet." These speed reading encyclopedias of "the Literature" must refer to "the Literature" at least 10 times before lunch or they begin sobbing uncontrollably followed by soiling themselves.

Google image search for "smug"

 

End sarcasm.

 

Research is ever tipping the helping versus hurting ratio of medicine towards the former. But please, can I just read the "good stuff?" I know that eating ten Big Macs per day is not a good idea. I don't need a randomized controlled trial where 50 people eat Big Macs for ten years and are compared to a control. Some things just are.

 

"Well, huh, might as, might as well ask why is a tree good? Why is the sunset good? Why are boobs good?"

     -Joe Dirt

 

Back to the turd sifting...