 |
|
Opportunities and Challenges of Laboratory Testing at Alternative Sites
Charles R. Handorf, MD, PhD;
William W. McLendon, MD
JAMA. 1995;274(16):1308-1309.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
|
|
A 15th-century woodcut portrays a physician making a house call at the bedside of his patient.1 The physician's right hand is on the patient's pulse while he points with his left hand to a flask of the patient's urine held up to the light by an assistant. In observing the urine, the physician is practicing the art of uroscopy, that is, the attempted gleaning of knowledge of the patient's condition from the direct observation of fresh urine. The science of laboratory medicine advanced little from the 15th to the 19th century, whereupon the introduction of medical microscopy greatly advanced the ability of physicians to observe and diagnose patients. Scientific and technical advances accelerated in the 20th century, especially after World War II, with astonishing speed and breathtaking scientific elegance. These advances allowed a remarkable enhancement of the physician's ability to diagnose; however, they carried a price: the transfer of
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
From the Methodist Hospitals of Memphis (Tenn) (Dr Handorf) and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (Dr McLendon).
Footnotes
Dr Handorf is chair of the Alternate Site Testing Committee, College of American Pathologists, and an advisory board member, i-Stat, Princeton, NJ, a manufacturer of alternate site testing equipment. Dr McLendon is editor of Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.
Reprint requests to the Methodist Hospitals of Memphis, 1265 Union Ave, Memphis, TN 38104 (Dr Handorf).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
|
