- J R Hampton,
- M J Harrison,
- J R Mitchell,
- J S Prichard,
- C Seymour
Abstract
To evaluate the relative importance of the medical history, the physical examination, and laboratory investigations in the diagnosis and management of medical outpatients some physicians recorded their diagnosis and a prediction of the method of managementafter reading the patient's referral letter, again after taking the history, and againafter performing the physical examination. These diagnoses and predictions were compared with the diagnosis and method of management which had been adopted two months after the patient's initial attendance. A diagnosis that agreed with the one finally accepted was made after reading the referral letter and taking the history in 66 out of 80 new patients; the physical examination was useful in only seven patients, and the laboratory investigations in a further seven. In only one of six patients in whom the physician was unable to make any diagnosis after taking the history and examining the patient did laboratory investigations lead to a positive diagnosis.
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Ethical considerations
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Raised inflammatory markers
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Physical activity for cancer survivors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Published 14 February 2012
Smokefree cars in Wales: Laws are better
Published 14 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (8 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012