Discussion about this post

User's avatar
cools's avatar

Thank you! I missed the dialysis study, but I really appreciated that it did something so many QI/QA projects fail to do: determine whether there’s any true clinical benefit after a change.

Still waiting for a POCUS study to show that—has one already? It should, but I’d love to see where and how that’s been demonstrated.

I also liked the IDSA guideline, mainly because it’s another example of well-meaning experts doing excellent work. Their critique of the data—on a relatively small but important question—was particularly sharp.

**IDSA seems to hold the largest societal divide between what guidelines recommend and what actually happens in practice. Too many cases of healthcare-associated pneumonia are still treated broadly in patients coming from assisted-living facilities, rather than shifting toward the hospital-acquired pneumonia classification as recommended.

We’re a nation that can only agree on a couple of things:

1) The Super Bowl is worth watching—whether for the game, the halftime show, or the commercials.

and

2) Vancomycin and Zosyn/cefepime will be given broadly to many sick hospitalized patients.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts