Evidence based medicine in physical medicine and rehabilitation (English version)

In the last twenty years the term “Evidence Based Medicine (EBM)” has spread into all areas of medicine and is often used for decision-making in the medical and public health sector. It is also used to verify the significance and/or the effectiveness of different therapies. The definition of EBM is to use the physician’s individual expertise, the patient’s needs and the best external evidence for each individual patient. Today, however, the term EBM is often wrongly used as a synonym for best “external evidence”. This leads not only to a misuse of evidence based medicine but suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of the model which was created by Gordon Guyatt, David Sackett and Archibald Cochrane. This problem becomes even greater the more social insurance institutions, public healthcare providers and politicians use external evidence alone as a main guideline for financing therapies in physical medicine and general rehabilitation without taking into account the physician’s expertise and the patient’s needs.The wrong interpretation of EBM can lead to the following problems: well established clinical therapies are either questioned or not granted and are therefore withheld from patients (for example physical pain management). Absence of evidence for individual therapy methods does not prove their ineffectiveness! In this short statement the significance of EBM in physical medicine and general rehabilitation will be analysed and discussed

On the relationship of first-episode psychosis to the amphetamine-sensitized state: a dopamine D2/3 receptor agonist radioligand study.

Schizophrenia is characterized by increased behavioral and neurochemical responses to dopamine-releasing drugs. This prompted the hypothesis of psychosis as a state of "endogenous" sensitization of the dopamine system although the exact basis of dopaminergic disturbances and the possible role of prefrontal cortical regulation have remained uncertain. To show that patients with first-episode psychosis release more dopamine upon amphetamine-stimulation than healthy volunteers, and to reveal for the first time that prospective sensitization induced by repeated amphetamine exposure increases dopamine-release in stimulant-naïve healthy volunteers to levels observed in patients, we collected data on amphetamine-induced dopamine release using the dopamine D2/3 receptor agonist radioligand [11C]-(+)-PHNO and positron emission tomography. Healthy volunteers (n = 28, 14 female) underwent a baseline and then a post-amphetamine scan before and after a mildly sensitizing regimen of repeated oral amphetamine. Unmedicated patients with first-episode psychosis (n = 21; 6 female) underwent a single pair of baseline and then post-amphetamine scans. Furthermore, T1 weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the prefrontal cortex was performed. Patients with first-episode psychosis showed larger release of dopamine compared to healthy volunteers. After sensitization of healthy volunteers their dopamine release was significantly amplified and no longer different from that seen in patients. Healthy volunteers showed a negative correlation between prefrontal cortical volume and dopamine release. There was no such relationship after sensitization or in patients. Our data in patients with untreated first-episode psychosis confirm the "endogenous sensitization" hypothesis and support the notion of impaired prefrontal control of the dopamine system in schizophrenia

Evidence based medicine in physical medicine and rehabilitation (German version)

In the last twenty years the term “Evidence Based Medicine (EBM)” has been increasingly applied in all areas of medicine and is often used for decision-making in the medical and public health sector. It is also used to verify the significance and/or the effectiveness of different therapies. The original definition of EBM rests on the following three pillars: the physician’s individual expertise, the patient’s needs and the best external evidence. Today, however, the term EBM is often wrongly used as a synonym for best external evidence, without taking into consideration the other two pillars of the model which was created by Gordon Guyatt, David Sackett and Archibald Cochrane. This problem becomes even greater the more social insurance institutions and politicians use external evidence alone as the main guideline for financing therapies and therapy guidelines in physical medicine and general rehabilitation without taking into account the physician’s expertise and the patient’s needs.The wrong interpretation of EBM can lead to the following problems: well established clinical therapies are either questioned or not granted and are therefore withheld from patients (for example physical pain management). An absence of evidence for individual therapy methods does not prove their ineffectiveness! In this short statement the significance of EBM in Physical Medicine and general rehabilitation will be analysed and discussed