Modify Your Subscription
Home > List Archives
"No So FAST"caesar ursic firstname.lastname@example.org
Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:36:25 -0800 (PST)
- 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