Define this

[offlabel]

Open ended question...What do you consider a "cardiac induction"? It's a term that is thrown around a lot but there isn't a hard and fast definition as to what it actually means.

[offlabel]

I understand what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree. Understanding when and how to best use research to base our practices on is the future and that is the path we are being expected to follow more and more.

So, if I'm giving the impression that I'm anti research, I feel really dumb...using it means being very critical and suspicious of it, though. Leaving the beta blocker fiasco aside, just day to day stuff like ACEI/ARB's in the perioperative period or the goofiness of so called perioperative tight glucose control should be enough to temper the weight of single studies or even meta analyses people place on their day to day practice.

It's disheartening to see someone change their practice in some big element of their care based on one study.

[wtbcrna, MSN, DNP, CRNA]

So, if I'm giving the impression that I'm anti research, I feel really dumb...using it means being very critical and suspicious of it, though. Leaving the beta blocker fiasco aside, just day to day stuff like ACEI/ARB's in the perioperative period or the goofiness of so called perioperative tight glucose control should be enough to temper the weight of single studies or even meta analyses people place on their day to day practice.

It's disheartening to see someone change their practice in some big element of their care based on one study.

Proper use of research is basing decisions on high quality evidence and in general that rarely applies to one study. We have a lot of dogma in anesthesia based on single studies: MP scores ( originally an n=10), no phenylephrine in OB, no ketamine for neuro, sevoflurane needs at least 2lpm....etc. I try to do my best to base my department and my practice on high quality evidence. That is also the way we teach are USUHS SRNAs.