Discussion about this post

User's avatar
The Rhythm's avatar

I am definitely old school but I am still of the view that a careful physical exam is essential. Pathology and imaging should be used to confirm or refute the provisional diagnosis made from a good history and exam. Using tests to replace observation results in far greater healthcare costs, a lot of unnecessary tests and potential wild goose chases if the tests are misreported or misinterpreted - which they are a good 10-20% of the time.

Expand full comment
Tom Stackhouse's avatar

My initial reaction to your tepid defense got me hot under the collar. After reading the essay, I can tell you there are moments during my encounters with worker compensation patients that make my blood boil. The "benefit" of advanced imaging eg MRI, CT has allowed those among us who are entrepreneurial a punch list of surgical indications. Changes due to aging such as meniscal tears, degenerative lumbar discs, TFCC tears are green lights to operate. I've had a patient refuse to undress for an IME exam because his spine surgeon never asked him to. As an orthopedist and hand surgeon, I can arrive at accurate differential diagnosis most of the time just by taking a good history. The bedside exam helps to winnow the outlying possibilities, create a therapeutic relationship and promote empathy.

Expand full comment
118 more comments...

No posts