Evidence-based practice versus Practice-based evidence

Scientists Bruce Lipton and Rupert Sheldrake discuss how evidence based medicine is holding back the liberation of medicine and techniques that really work in practice.

There is a huge requirement for the healthcare industry to collate practice based evidence. Clinical trials have huge limitations and implications, which is why Real Naturo practitioners and therapists are invested in research of medicine that works in practice.  If you are a patient or a practitioner and wish to be part of this research please get in touch.

“Practice-Based Evidence.” Most of us have become very familiar with “evidence-based practice” as the key to utilizing the best research to inform practice. However, this term is often misconstrued as “if it isn’t proven via an RCT (randomized controlled trial), it should never be done.” This misconception stems from the historical concept of the scientific method, which infers that we can understand our world in a cause and effect way. However, to quote Albert Einstein, surely one of the greatest scientific minds in history: “Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”

In the concept of Practice-Based Evidence, the real, messy, complicated world is not controlled. Instead, real world practice is documented and measured, just as it occurs, “warts” and all. It is the process of measurement and tracking that matters, not controlling how practice is delivered. This allows us to answer a different, but no less important, question than “does X cause Y?” This question is “how does adding X PT intervention alter the complex personalized system of patient Y before me?” Julie Fritz and her colleagues in Utah are one group that has used this method to explore physical therapy processes for persons with low back pain.¹ Their findings regarding the best interventions and processes for physical therapy for REAL patients is truly the best type of translational research that can be done. Patients are not controlled as research subjects, who must meet certain inclusion/exclusion criteria. Rather they are grouped together by factors they share. This type of research respects that people are complex, and don’t readily fit the “cause and effect” model of science.

The above is an abstract from Swisher, Anne K. “Practice-based evidence” Cardiopulmonary physical therapy journal vol. 21,2 (2010): 4.