Background: Evidence-based medicine (EbM) is a vital part of reasonable and conclusive decision making for clinicians in daily clinical work. To analyze the knowledge and the attitude of surgeons towards EbM, a survey was performed in the UK and Germany. Methods: A web-based questionnaire was distributed via mailing lists from the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE) and the Berufsverband Deutscher Chirurgen (BDC). Our primary aim was to get information about knowledge of EbM amongst German and British surgeons. Results: A total of 549 individuals opened the questionnaire, but only 198 questionnaires were complete and valid for analysis. In total, 40,000 recipients were approached via the mailing lists of the BDC and RCSE. The response rate was equally low in both countries. On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 10 (very important), all participants rated EbM as very important for daily clinical decision making (7.3 ± 1.9) as well as for patients (7.8 ± 1.9) and the national health system (7.8 ± 1.9). On a scale from 1 (unimportant) to 5 (very important), systematic reviews (4.6 ± 0.6) and randomized controlled trials (4.6 ± 0.6) were identified as the highest levels of study designs to enhance evidence in medicine. British surgeons considered EbM to be more important in daily clinical work when compared to data from German surgeons (7.9 ± 1.6 vs. 6.7 ± 2.1, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed different results in some categories; however, a pattern to explain the differences was not evident. Personal requirements expressed in a free text field emphasized the results and reflected concerns such as broad unwillingness and lack of interdisciplinary approaches for patients (n = 59: 25 in the UK and 34 in Germany). Conclusion: The overall results show that EbM is believed to be important by surgeons in the UK and Germany. However, perception of EbM in the respective health system (UK vs. Germany) may be different. Nonetheless, EbM is an important tool to navigate through daily clinical problems although a discrepancy between the knowledge of theoretical abstract terms and difficulties in implementing EbM in daily clinical work has been detected. The provision of infrastructure, courses and structured education as a permanent instrument will advance the knowledge, application and improvement of EbM in the future.

1.
Rosenberg W, Donald A: Evidence based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ 1995;310:1122-1126.
2.
Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:71-72.
3.
Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D, Smith R: Evidence based medicine. BMJ 1995;310:1085-1086.
4.
Diener MK, Knebel P, Fink C, Dörr-Harim C, Rossion I, Werner J, et al: Clinical trials in surgery. On the way towards evidence-based surgery (in German). Chirurg 2012;83:315-318.
5.
Diener MK, Wolff RF, von Elm E, Rahbari NN, Mavergames C, Knaebel H-P, et al: Can decision making in general surgery be based on evidence? An empirical study of Cochrane Reviews. Surgery 2009;146:444-461.
6.
Schwenk W, Haase O, Müller JM: Changing surgical therapy because of clinical studies? (in German). Zentralbl Chir 2002;127:258-264.
7.
Keus F, de Jong JAF, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJHM: Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;4:CD006231.
8.
Keus F, de Jong JAF, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJHM: Laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;4:CD006229.
9.
Keus F, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJ: Open, small-incision, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. An overview of Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD008318.
10.
Barkun AN, Barkun JS, Sampalis JS, Caro J, Fried GM, Meakins JL, et al: Costs and effectiveness of extracorporeal gallbladder stone shock wave lithotripsy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomized clinical trial. McGill Gallstone Treatment Group. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997;13:589-601.
11.
Bass EB, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD: Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1993;165:466-471.
12.
Bosch F, Wehrman U, Saeger H-D, Kirch W: Laparoscopic or open conventional cholecystectomy: clinical and economic considerations. Eur J Surg Acta Chir 2002;168:270-277.
13.
Fajardo R, Valenzuela JI, Olaya SC, Quintero G, Carrasquilla G, Pinzón CE, et al: Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy (in Spanish). Biomedica 2011;31:514-524.
14.
Fullarton GM, Darling K, Williams J, MacMillan R, Bell G: Evaluation of the cost of laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1994;81:124-126.
15.
Kelley JE, Burrus RG, Burns RP, Graham LD, Chandler KE: Safety, efficacy, cost, and morbidity of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy: a prospective analysis of 228 consecutive patients. Am Surg 1993;59:23-27.
16.
Keskin A: Is laparoscopic cholecystectomy cheaper? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2005;15:191-194; discussion 194.
17.
Kesteloot K, Penninckx F: The costs and effects of open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Health Econ 1993;2:303-312.
18.
Keating NL, Landrum MB, Lamont EB, Bozeman SR, Shulman LN, McNeil BJ: Tumor boards and the quality of cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013;105:113-121.
19.
Bell RH: National curricula, certification and credentialing. Surgeon 2011;9(suppl 1):S10-S11.
20.
Weikert S, Baumunk D, Stephan C, Cash H, Jahnke K, Steiner U, et al: Introduction of interdisciplinary prostate cancer centers based on the recommendations of the German Cancer Society. A cost-benefit analysis 3 years after accreditation (in German). Urologe A 2011;50:1083-1088.
21.
Fink C, Keck T, Rossion I, Weitz J, Diener MK, Büchler MW, et al: Contribution of the Study Center of the German Surgical Society to evidence based surgery (in German). Chirurg 2011;82:1109-1115.
22.
Schiessling S, Diener MK, Post S, Büchler MW, Seiler CM: Clinical trials in surgery - health care research of the future? (in German). Zentralbl Chir 2011;136:87-89.
23.
Pengel L, Morris P: The transplant library of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. Transplantation 2011;92:613-616.
24.
Schnitzbauer AA, Lang SA, Goessmann H, Nadalin S, Baumgart J, Farkas SA, et al: Right portal vein ligation combined with in situ splitting induces rapid left lateral liver lobe hypertrophy enabling 2-staged extended right hepatic resection in small-for-size settings. Ann Surg 2012;255:405-414.
25.
Hackert T, Bruckner T, Dörr-Harim C, Diener MK, Knebel P, Hartwig W, et al: Pylorus resection or pylorus preservation in partial pancreatico-duodenectomy (PROPP study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:44.
26.
Löffler T, Rossion I, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Koch M, von Frankenberg M, et al: HAnd Suture Versus STApling for Closure of Loop Ileostomy (HASTA Trial): results of a multicenter randomized trial (DRKS00000040). Ann Surg 2012;256:828-835; discussion 835-836.
27.
Diener MK, Seiler CM, von Frankenberg M, Rendel K, Schüle S, Maschuw K, et al: Vascular clips versus ligatures in thyroid surgery - results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (CLIVIT Trial). Langenbecks Arch Surg 2012;397:1117-1126.
28.
Schnitzbauer AA, Schlitt HJ, Geissler EK: Influence of immunosuppressive drugs on the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation: a gap between basic science and clinical evidence. Transplantation 2011;91:1173-1176.
29.
Schnitzbauer AA, Doenecke A, Sothmann JL, Loss M, Farkas SA, Hartl J, et al: Improved outcome after ‘bottom-up' immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients with preoperative renal impairment. Eur Surg Res 2010;45:356-367.
30.
Schnitzbauer AA, Scherer MN, Rochon J, Sothmann J, Farkas SA, Loss M, et al: Study protocol: a pilot study to determine the safety and efficacy of induction-therapy, de novo MPA and delayed mTOR-inhibition in liver transplant recipients with impaired renal function. PATRON-study. BMC Nephrol 2010;11:24.
31.
Schnitzbauer AA, Zuelke C, Graeb C, Rochon J, Bilbao I, Burra P, et al: A prospective randomised, open-labeled, trial comparing sirolimus-containing versus mTOR-inhibitor-free immunosuppression in patients undergoing liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2010;10:190.
32.
Glockzin G, Rochon J, Arnold D, Lang SA, Klebl F, Zeman F, et al: A prospective multicenter phase II study evaluating multimodality treatment of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis arising from appendiceal and colorectal cancer: the COMBATAC trial. BMC Cancer 2013;13:67.
33.
Stein A, Glockzin G, Wienke A, Arnold D, Edelmann T, Hildebrandt B, et al: Treatment with bevacizumab and FOLFOXIRI in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: presentation of two novel trials (CHARTA and PERIMAX) and review of the literature. BMC Cancer 2012;12:356.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.