My little corner of the pediatric world seems to be rather occupied of late with a recent study published in the BMJ.  The study looked at a group of 240 kids in the Netherlands who were given either amoxicillin (an antibiotic) or placebo for treatment of otitis media (ear infection).  Looking back 3.5 years later, the researchers discovered that those kids who were randomized to receive amoxicillin had a 2.5 times higher risk of recurrent ear infection.

The trend in recent years has been for less and less antibiotic treatment of ear infection, opting instead for a “wait and see” approach for uncomplicated cases.  This has been a reflection of data that shows that most ear infections are caused by viruses (not helped by antibiotics), and that it doesn’t seem to make much difference whether one treats simple ear infections with antibiotics or not.

So you would think that docs would be receptive to this additional data further reinforcing the lack of need for antibiotics in many, if not most, ear infections.  You would think that, but you would be wrong.  Pediatricians and family medicine physicians have spent a lot of time on the intertubes resisting reduction of their antibiotic usage in ear infections, citing personal experience and anecdotal evidence (“back in my day…”) while giving wild exhortations in CAPITAL LETTERS.

The one thing that these docs don’t use to make their point is data – real data.  By that I mean large, randomized, well-controlled studies that seek to eliminate confounding variables and answer a specific clinical question.  At what point does personal experience become real data?  Never.  How long does one have to practice before their anecdotes become a valid basis for policy?  Let’s just say longer than anyone is willing to wait.

I pause here to realize that even doctors, for all their education, for all the trust placed in them by their patients, are just as prone as anyone to having “blind spots” – areas of thought that refuse to accept evidence contrary to their beliefs.  For some doctors, it’s vaccines and autism.  For others it’s herbal medicine.  For these docs, it just happens to be antibiotics and ear infections.

So what will it take to shed enough light on the issue to get these docs to change?  A large part of it, I think, is getting people to take their blinders off.  But this, unfortunately, is something you can’t do for them.  It’s not easy to self-criticize, but I firmly believe that opening your own practice and knowledge to critique can only help you become  more knowledgeable, more humble, and a better doctor.  Failing to do so might preserve a frail ego, but it does disservice to everyone else.