For those of us advocating more systematic research on innovations and outcomes, an article in today’s Washington Post may  be helpful.

The article describes the relative success of the military in figuring out what new treatments work and getting them adopted quickly.

The article contracts a study done at Harvard Med in the 1990s, showing how it took a decade or more for new heart treatment innovations (aspirin and clot-dissolving thrombolytic drugs) to be widely used.

The US military maintains a 40.000 entry database of injuries, treatments and, most crucially outcomes.  Here is one example of how it is used:

“The registry is a data mine that, excavated properly, can yield nuggets of insight.
Consider “abdominal compartment syndrome,” a rare condition most often seen in burn patients, in which internal organs swell and essentially choke each other.  The registry allowed doctors to correlate the syndrome with the amount of IV fluid given. Guidelines for fluid resuscitation of burn victims were rewritten and the problem “went to zero overnight,” said Col. Brian J. Eastridge, an Army surgeon who helps run the registry.”

Just think how pathetic is our investment into research on civil justice interventions and outcomes.  Special kudos to the California AOC and the Hennepin County MN Court for having their own dedicated research departments.  Please let me know of other courts that should be added to this list.  Cutting research in tough times is like eating your seed corn over the winter.