There was once a time in medicine when anything that defined our clinical practice had to be peer reviewed and was subject to medical trials before we took it on board as ‘best practice’. However, we all know that aesthetic medicine is a relatively new speciality and scientific papers can contain conflicting information, often recounting experiences and opinions rather than controlled or comparative clinical data. Many published papers are case records rather than clinical trials and studies are often cadaveric and in vitro, rather than in vivo, meaning interpretation is open to subjectivity and bias. So, where should we turn to in order to determine what is ‘best practice’ in our field?
I regularly find it very frustrating when practitioners stand up on stage at a big congress and state an opinion as if it is proven to be correct. It is then taken by the audience as the gospel truth…