An ongoing randomized clinical trial in dysphagia.
Most of us who have clinical practices firmly contend that the treatments we provide cause beneficial changes in the lives of our patients. Indeed, our clinical experience engenders strong convictions to the point of believing that withholding treatment creates ethical violations. Intellectually, however, we must recognize that the value of treatment needs to be validated through scientific evidence. This paper examines the use of randomized clinical trials as a means of obtaining the type of evidence relevant for work in health care settings.


OBJECTIVE
(1) Readers will be able to explain why randomized clinical trials are conducted. (2) Readers will be able to describe the challenges faced when conducting randomized clinical trials. (3) Readers will be able to explain the ethical considerations involved in study design. (4) Readers will be able to describe the implementation and procedures used in Protocol 201. (5) Readers will be able to describe the two dysphagia interventions and the expected short and long-term effects of these interventions.
Robbins
JoAnne
J
Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1300 University Avenue, 2245 MSC, 53706, USA.
Hind
Jackie
J
Logemann
Jerilyn
J
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001466:Barium Sulfate / Q000737:chemistry; D002985:Clinical Protocols / Q000592:standards*; D003680:Deglutition Disorders / Q000150:complications / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy*; D003704:Dementia / Q000150:complications; D005260:Female; D005471:Fluoroscopy; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010300:Parkinson Disease / Q000150:complications; D011015:Pneumonia, Aspiration / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014783:Viscosity
D001466:Barium Sulfate