Evidence-Based Medicine Vs Ayurveda Based Evidence

During the last decade, the concept of EvidenceBased Medicine (EBM) caused great interest among health professionals. The actual term “evidence-based medicine” was first coined by Gordon Guyatt, the Program Director of Internal Medicine at McMaster University from 1990 to 1997, who was and one of Sackett’s mentees in 1991. EBM is medical practice or care that emphasizes the practical application of the findings of the best available current research. According to the definition, Evidence-Based Medicine represents the integration of clinical expertise, patient values, and the best available evidence in process of decisionmaking related to patients’ health care. Evidence-based medicine aims to assess the strength of proof behind medical interventions in terms of risks and benefits, and therefore can be used to inform clinical decision-making on both an individual and a population basis. Clinicians and patients are the major players in generating pieces of evidence. Three elements of EBM are Best Available Evidence, Clinician’s Knowledge and Skills, and the Patient’s Wants and Needs. It comes in five steps as follows:

1. Convert information needs into answerable questions.

2. Track down with maximum efficiency the best evidence with which to answer them.

3. Critically appraise that evidence for its validity and usefulness.

4. Apply the results of this appraisal in the practice.

5. Evaluate the performance.

Evidence are generated through Systematic Reviews, Randomized Controlled Trials, Cohort Studies, Casecontrol Studies, Case-series etc.

Evidence in Ayurveda

Ayurveda science proposes the Concept of Pramana or Pariksha for generating and validating shreds of evidence. The different Pariksha are Pratyaksha, Anumana, Aptopadesha, Yukti, and Upamana. In the present day, most of the researchers are obsessed with the methods adopted by modern researchers in creating evidences. The obsession is so much so that the research itself seems to have become methodology driven instead of research problem-driven. Hence the assessment parameters are getting limited to signs and symptoms of the disease under research. Whereas Ayurveda emphasises on the restoration of normal physiology which is poorly attended by Ayurveda researchers. Health is the outcome of any clinical intervention hence evidences need to be created and evaluated for that too. Ayurveda vaidyas have another responsibility to prevent the recurrence of disease, this is possible by not merely treating the disease but correcting the physiology and prescribing personalised dos and don’ts. Hence along with creating the best evidences in clinical practice, it is also essential to see that those evidences stand firm on fundamental principles of Ayurveda.