Produto disponível até 15min após  a confirmação do pagamento!
Você pode ler este livro digital em vários dispositivos:
IOs - Clique para baixar o app gratuitoAndroid - Clique para baixar o app gratuitoPC - Clique para baixar o app gratuitoBlackBerry - Clique para baixar o app gratuitoWindows Phone - Clique para baixar o app gratuitoKobo - Conheça nossa linha de leitores digitais
Helps clinicians to systematically look beyond the obvious to arrive at a correct diagnosis
Written specifically for both novice and experienced cardiovascular clinicians in acute care settings, this is the only resource to focus on the art of conducting an in-depth patient history. Too often, a patient will tell their first provider one thing, and their second provider another. Even when asked the exact same question, patients’ stories can inexplicably change. Clinicians can save time, effort, and cost by parsing out conflicting patient histories by adopting a specific and detailed a line of questioning. If recorded accurately and interpreted correctly, comprehensive history alone can obtain a correct diagnosis without exhaustive and expensive evaluations.
This book includes two clinical scenarios for chief complaints that cardiovascular clinicians may see in their practice. Unpacking these scenarios challenge clinicians to look beyond the obvious and recognize atypical presentations. Each scenario dissects and then discusses the history and other pertinent patient information to illuminate subtle differences in the process of information gathering. With this breakdown, the clinician can then identify if the patient has an acute cardiovascular issue. Each chapter ends with a sample of “how to present the patient” to an MD or peer and describes common pitfalls and assumptions to avoid.
Focuses specifically on acute cardiovascular issues in acute care settings
Referenced by chief complaint or consult questions
Targets patient history portion of the work up
Examines subtle differences between cardiac diagnosis vs. non-cardiac diagnosis based on how patient history is taken
Highlights common errors in review of information using EMR vs. standard questioning