National Prescribing Centre

rss
Home | Evidence Based Therapeutics | Information Mastery
spacer

 

Information Mastery

Visit NPCi to view our current Information Resources

The NPC has now embraced the concept of Information Mastery which addresses the difficulties clinicians, managers and patients have in finding the best evidence for individual clinical situations. Even when restricted to guidelines, the sheer volume of information required to be read, retained and applied in clinical situations is overwhelming. The NPC has worked with leading researchers and academics on both sides of the Atlantic and concluded that an innovative new solution is required in order to utilise evidence effectively within concordant consultations. In 2007/08 the NPC continued the Information Mastery approach for a variety of audiences with a range of outputs delivered via NPCi and in workshops at national events.

Background

In March 2005, the NPC were proud to host Information Mastery UK 2005 - two conferences attended by over 100 healthcare professionals run by the founders of InfoPOEMs: Profs David Slawson and Allen Shaughnessy. While over 500 individuals have attended their courses run in the USA since April 1996, this was the first time such a conference had been held in the UK.

So what is Information Mastery?

From medical journals to the daily news, healthcare providers and patients are bombarded by information. Healthcare professionals must accept and feel comfortable with the fact that there is absolutely no way that they can keep pace with the information explosion.

So, healthcare practitioners must develop effective ways of identifying, filtering, evaluating, using and, most importantly, applying new information to

enhance patient care.

pills on books

According to the principles of Information Mastery, we should assess the usefulness of information first by determining its relevance as there is no point reading about an intervention unless it:

  • is FEASIBLE locally,
  • shows that patients can live longer or better – i.e. the OUTCOMES* studied matter,
  • would lead to a CHANGE in your practice, and
  • looks at a condition that is COMMON in your practice.

* so we're not interested in and don't care about research that only shows changes in, for example, the patient's biochemistry.

Allen Shaunessy

If the information is relevant in these ways, then, and only then, does the research need to be critically appraised for validity. This is a difficult skill to learn and practice, so wherever possible most health care practitioners should rely on digests of evidence where the critical appraisal has already been done by a trusted source.

Above all, busy health care practitioners need to stop trying to stay up-to-date by reading, and instead use a strategy (and/or tools) to

search quickly to find the best answer (not just any answer) to the clinical problems they face. The evaluation of information can be expressed as a formula:

Usefulness = Relevance x Validity
                    Time and Effort Required

The conference explored these principles in great detail. The reaction of delegates to these concepts quickly changed from quiet (and healthy) scepticism, through a tacit acceptance of the problem to wholehearted enthusiasm by the end of the two days. Feedback from delegates who attended these days has been nothing short of stunning - so much so that many felt enthused enough to begin teaching these concepts back at their bases.

Further information on these concepts can be found here:

 

Freedom of Information | Accessibility | Terms and Conditions