Landsman Gail H
University at Albany, SUNY, NY, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Jun;62(11):2670-80. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.028. Epub 2005 Dec 28.
To provide recommendations based on the best scientific evidence available about "best practices," the New York State Department of Health Early Intervention Program sponsored the development of an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for assessment and intervention for young children with motor disabilities. The author served on the multidisciplinary consensus panel convened to develop the guideline, holding a position as a parent of a child with motor disabilities, and in addition utilizing data from her qualitative anthropological research on mothers of young children newly diagnosed with disabilities. This article describes the state panel's process for developing the guideline, focusing on recommendations about physical therapy interventions for cerebral palsy. Although evidence-based practice privileges randomized clinical trials, few studies of physical therapy techniques for young children with motor disabilities meet such criteria for evidence. The panel's recommendations, in the absence of such scientific evidence, are analyzed in comparison with competing theories of motor development in physical therapy research and practice, and with interpretations of physical therapy held by mothers of young children with disabilities who were interviewed in the study. The article explores questions of what constitutes evidence in three arenas: (1) clinical practice guidelines, (2) physical therapy research, and (3) the lives of families of young children with motor disabilities. It has broader implications for understanding how information, variously derived, is transformed into evidence. While to some extent authority and power affect the range of knowledge that can be transformed into evidence, the more significant constraints may be the rules of evidence we value and the particular paradigm of our science.
为了基于现有最佳科学证据就“最佳实践”提供建议,纽约州卫生部早期干预项目赞助制定了一项关于运动障碍幼儿评估与干预的循证临床实践指南。作者作为多学科共识小组的成员参与了该指南的制定,她以一名运动障碍儿童家长的身份加入小组,此外还运用了她对新诊断出残疾的幼儿母亲进行定性人类学研究的数据。本文描述了州级小组制定该指南的过程,重点关注关于脑瘫物理治疗干预的建议。尽管循证实践优先考虑随机临床试验,但针对运动障碍幼儿的物理治疗技术研究很少符合此类证据标准。在缺乏此类科学证据的情况下,将小组的建议与物理治疗研究和实践中相互竞争的运动发育理论,以及在研究中接受访谈的残疾幼儿母亲对物理治疗的理解进行了比较分析。本文探讨了在三个领域中什么构成证据的问题:(1)临床实践指南,(2)物理治疗研究,以及(3)运动障碍幼儿家庭的生活。这对于理解以不同方式获取的信息如何转化为证据具有更广泛的意义。虽然在某种程度上,权威和权力会影响能够转化为证据的知识范围,但更重要的限制可能是我们所重视的证据规则以及我们科学的特定范式。