PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Rasmus Greibe

Publications and source records attributed to Rasmus Greibe.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Effect of teaching and type of stethoscope on cardiac auscultatory performance.

BACKGROUND: Auscultation of the heart is a routine procedure. It is not known whether auscultatory skills can be improved by teaching or with the use of an advanced stethoscope. METHODS: This study was a randomized trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Seventy-two house officers were randomized to a simple or an advanced stethoscope and to a 4-hour course in auscultation or no course. The doctors auscultated 20 patients' hearts and categorized findings as normal or as one or more of 5 categories of heart diseases. Patients were selected such that 16 had a known heart disease as well as a corresponding murmur and 4 had no heart disease or murmur. Auscultatory performance was assessed as concordance with echocardiographic findings and interobserver variation. RESULTS: Doctors using the advanced stethoscope diagnosed 35% of the patients correctly, as compared with doctors using the simple stethoscope who did 33% of the patients (P = .27). Similarly, 34% of the patients were diagnosed correctly by doctors who had received teaching as compared with 33% of those who were by doctors who had received no teaching (P = .41). The kappa values were higher for doctors who had received teaching for aortic stenosis (0.43 vs 0.28, P = .004) and ventricular septum defect (0.07 vs 0.01, P = .003). There was no difference between groups for any other single murmur or for the detection of murmurs as such. CONCLUSION: Heart auscultation findings were in poor accordance with echocardiographic findings and had high interobserver variation. Neither outcome improved to any important extent with the subjects' use of an advanced stethoscope or attending of a course in heart auscultation.

Adult↗

Does a distal forearm fracture lead to evaluation for osteoporosis? A retrospective cohort study in 147 Danish women.

In postmenopausal women, a low-trauma distal forearm fracture is a risk factor for osteoporosis and future fracture, which indicates osteoporosis follow-up according to prevailing guidelines. We decided to determine how often women over 45 yr presenting with a low-trauma distal forearm fracture to a Danish emergency department during a 1-yr period were followed up for osteoporosis. We performed a retrospective review of hospital records and we sent the women and their general practitioners (GPs) questionnaires regarding the follow-up undertaken in primary care. Finally, we invited the women for a densitometry to estimate the prevalence of osteoporosis. From May 1, 2001 to April 30, 2002, 147 women presented with a low-trauma distal forearm fractures. According to the review of hospital records, none of the women was referred for bone densitometry or spine X-rays. One woman had calcium and vitamin D supplementation (CVDS) prescribed and two were recommended to consult their GPs for osteoporosis follow-up. In primary care, 12 women were referred for densitometry or spine X-rays, and 11 women started CVDS after the fracture. Women with risk factors for osteoporosis in addition to the forearm fracture were not more likely to be referred for densitometry or spine X-rays (p = 0.10). The prevalence of osteoporosis was 24% among the 79 women who underwent densitometry. Our study demonstrates a low use of available measures to reduce the risk of future fracture in women with a low-trauma distal forearm fracture, and it emphasizes the need to decide on a local level how to provide osteoporosis follow-up for women with fragility fractures.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗