On February 11th, we will be presenting a thorough analysis of the following New England Journal of Medicine paper:
Ultrasonography versus Computed Tomography for Suspected Nephrolithiasis
by R. Smith-Bindman, et al.
Click here for the article
Possible questions to comment on and/or ponder:
1. Does this paper change my ED management for suspected nephrolithiasis? Why or why not?
2. How could the methodology of this study been improved? What did they do well?
3. If you were going to do this study, how would you have done it differently?
4. Why did the study use stone passage or surgical intervention as gold standard? What would you have used?
5. If you did do bedside ED US at our shop, would it decrease Length of Stay?
By Dr. Andrew Grock
The views expressed on this blog are the author's own and do not reflect the views of their employer. Please read our full disclaimer here. Any references to clinical cases refer to patients treated at a virtual hospital, Janus General Hospital.
The following two tabs change content below.
andygrock
- Resident Editor In Chief of blog.clinicalmonster.com.
- Co-Founder and Co-Director of the ALiEM AIR Executive Board - Check it out here: http://www.aliem.com/aliem-approved-instructional-resources-air-series/
- Resident at Kings County Hospital
Latest posts by andygrock (see all)
- A Tox Mystery…. - May 26, 2015
- Of Course, US Only for Kidney Stones… - May 18, 2015
- Case of the Month 11: Answer - May 12, 2015
- Too Classic a Question to Be Bored Review - May 5, 2015
- Case of the Month 11: Presentation - May 1, 2015
Radiologists recently published a little push back on this. They found there were a lot of “incidental findings” that only CT can find.
http://www.jacr.org/article/S1546-1440%2814%2900425-6/abstract