No replies to this topic

[stocks]

Andrew Booth, from the School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR) in Sheffield, is assessing the proportion of modern treatments that are "evidence-based" - supported by "randomised controlled trials", which, if run correctly, give the best view on the value of a drug or device.

In the UK, researchers have assessed this in a variety of different parts of the health service, from busy GP surgeries to specialist hospital haematology units.

In many units, between 15% and 20% of the treatments offered did not have a shred of worthwhile evidence to support their use.

Andrew Booth said the medical establishment was well aware of this.

"The public might be surprised at the low number of treatments which have evidence that they work - but doctors might be surprised that it is so high," he said.

He added that frequently, even when new research suggested clearly that doctors should stop using a particular treatment, nothing changed.

Michael Summers, chairman of The Patients Association, said patients would be "really surprised" to learn how little of what doctors did had been proven to work.


http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/6524865.stm