ReviewCurrent opinion in critical care2017
Why do we fail to deliver evidence-based practice in critical care medicine?
Review in Current opinion in critical care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delivery of Lung-protective Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Hybrid Implementation-Effectiveness Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Trial
- The Start of a Good Innings, 50 Years of Intensive Care Medicine.World journal of surgery · 2026Review
- Optimising time-limited trials in acute respiratory failure: a multicentre focused ethnography protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- A Research Agenda to Mitigate Racial and Ethnic Disparities in U.S. Critical Care Medicine: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Patient Safety Incident Reporting and Learning Guidelines Implemented by Health Care Professionals in Specialized Care Units: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- ARDS, guidelines and ANZ practice: The persistent disconnect.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2024Article
- Characterizing the Use of Time-Limited Trials in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure: A Prospective, Single-Center Observational Study.Critical care explorations · 2024Observational
- Variation in Sedative and Analgesic Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Outcomes.CHEST critical care · 2024Article
- Chinese experts' consensus on the application of intensive care big data.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Prioritizing evidence-based practices for acute respiratory distress syndrome using digital data: an iterative multi-stakeholder process.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Physicians' cognitive approach to prognostication after cardiac arrest.Resuscitation · 2022Article
- Promoting Evidence-Based Practice in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review.Critical care explorations · 2021Review
- Implementation of the ABCDEF Bundle for Critically Ill ICU Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-National 1-Day Point Prevalence Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Determinants of Evidence-based Practice Uptake in Rural Intensive Care Units. A Mixed Methods Study.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Article
- Conceptual framework of equity-focused implementation research for health programs (EquIR).International journal for equity in health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe use of evidence-based practices in clinical practice is frequently inadequate. Recent research has uncovered many barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practices in critical care medicine. Using a comprehensive conceptual framework, this review identifies and classifies the barriers to implementation of several major critical care evidence-based practices. RECENT
findingsThe many barriers that have been recently identified can be classified into domains of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR). Barriers to the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) include ARDS under-recognition. Barriers to the use of the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle for mechanically ventilated patients and the sepsis bundle include patient-related, clinician-related, protocol-related, contextual-related, and intervention-related factors. Although these many barriers can be classified into all five CFIR domains (intervention, outer setting, inner setting, individuals, and process), most barriers fall within the individuals and inner setting domains. SUMMARY: There are many barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practice in critical care medicine. Systematically classifying these barriers allows implementation researchers and clinicians to design targeted implementation strategies, giving them the greatest chance of success in improving the use of evidence-based practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.