Guidelines warfare over interventional techniques: is there a lack of discourse or straw man?

摘要: Guideline development seems to have lost some of its grounding as a medical science. At their best, guidelines should be constructive response assist practicing physicians in applying the exponentially expanding body knowledge. In fact, guideline evolving into cottage industry with multiple, frequently discordant guidance on same subject. Evidence Based Medicine does not always provide for conclusive opinions. With competing interests payers, practitioners, health policy makers, and third parties benefiting from cost saving measures, preparation has been described based pre-possession, vagary, rationalization, or congeniality conclusion. Beyond legitimate differences opinions regarding evidence that could yield different there are potentials conflicts interest various other issues play major role development. As is case, must evaluated considered. Following American Pain Society (APS) an uproar interventional pain management communities related only synthesis, but interest. A recent manuscript published by Chou et al, addition previous publications, appears limited clinician involvement APS guidelines, demonstrates these challenges clearly. This illustrates deficiencies al's criticisms, significant interest, use lack appropriate evaluations straw man support argument. Further, this review will attempt demonstrate excessive focus inhibited critique what we believe flaws approach.