"No So FAST"

• Previous message: "No So FAST"
• Next message: Trauma destination legislation
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

You've missed my point.  It is only by performing
studies of this type that we can ever conclude with
any degree of certainty that FAST is an inappropriate
test in stable abdominal trauma victims when CT is
readily available.  Was this study really necessary? 
Maybe, maybe not.  It clearly DOES adds to a small but
increasing body of literature on the subject and
supports my and, I think, your bias that stable
patients are better off getting CT scanned than
FAST-ed.  Unless you can show that THE definitive
article on the matter already exists, dismissing this
study as irrelevant seems a bit short-sighted.  

C.M. Ursic, M.D.
Dept. of Surgery
UCSF-East Bay
Oakland, California


> > The truths you espouse are not so self-evident to
> > everyone
> 
> Then, "they" simplyy ought to spend more time
> reading than espousing--because 
> there is nothing in the literature on FAST to say
> anything else
> ERF
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

• Previous message: "No So FAST"
• Next message: Trauma destination legislation
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]