This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Recommended Readings
Bickley LS, Hoekelman RA, Bates B: Bates’ Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking, ed 7. Philadelphia, JB Lippincott Co, 1998. Initial edition was published in 1974; it provides explicit guidelines on physical examination maneuvers. The text is large and bulky, and it is similar in size to several other books (such as Seidel, 1999; Swartz, 2001; Willms et al., 1994); a videotape series and a pocket-sized edition (“baby Bates”) also are available.
DeGowin RL, Brown DD: DeGowin’s Diagnostic Examination. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1999. Original edition was by Richard DeGowin’s father, and the book is in its seventh edition; this 4-by 6-inch soft-backed book is organized by systems and findings; its structure makes it an efficient, useful source for looking things up but not as helpful when trying to learn the examination.
Elliot DL, Goldberg L: The Clinical Examination Casebook. Boston, Little, Brown & Co, 1996. This book does the best job of bridging the gap between the basic physical examination guides and medical textbooks (we might be biased); brief patient vignettes, accompanied by a narrative text and tables, show how patient assessment is used to define abnormalities.
Macklis RM, Mendelson ME, Mudge GH Jr: Introduction to Clinical Medicine: A Student-to-Student Manual. Boston, Little Brown & Co, 1994. Several different paperback books attempt to meet the needs of beginning clerks; along with physical examination information, they contain advice about ward routine, presenting cases and medical “workups.”
Annotated References
Antonelli MA: Usefulness of a data-collection form in learning physical diagnosis. Acad Med 68:171, 1993. (Brief letter that reviewed students’ write-ups and found standard history and physical exam forms were useful and not a “crutch.”)
Asken MJ, Raham DC: Resident performance and sleep deprivation: A review. J Med Educ 58:382–388, 1983.
Beckmann CRB, Lipscomb GH, Williford L, et al: Gynecological teaching associates in the 1990s. Med Edu 26:105–109, 1992. (The authors point out the unique advantages to this teaching method: immediate firsthand feedback on abilities, and a relaxed and supportive learning environment; they also caution that budget constraints may compromise this educational strategy.)
Bickley LS, Hoeklman, RA, Bates, B: Bates’ Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking, ed 7: Philadelphia, JB Lippincott Co, 1998.
Birdwell BG, Herbers JE, Kroenke K: Evaluating chest pain. JAMA 153:1991–1995, 1993.
Canadian Task Forces on the Periodic Health Examination: The periodic health examination: 2; 1987 update. Can Med Assoc J 138;619–628, 1988.
Carney PA, Dietrich AJ, Freeman DH Jr, Mott LA: The period health examination provided to asymptomatic older women: An assessment using standardized patients. Ann Intern Med 119:129–135, 1993. [98 physicians (one-third IM and two-third FM) were visited by a standardized patient for a check-up; physician-patient interactions varied from 5 to 60 minutes (average 28 minutes), and percentage of the recommended examination components varied from 16 to 89%.]
Carruthers A: A force to promote bonding and well-being: Therapeutic touch and massage. Prof Nurse 7:297–300, 1992. (This author briefly reviews therapeutic touch.)
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University: Clinical disagreement: I. How often it occurs and why. Can Med Assoc J 123:499–504, 1980a.
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University: Clinical disagreement: II. How to avoid it and how to learn from one’s mistakes. Can Med Assoc J 123:499–504, 1980b. (These two articles present information about measures of clinical disagreement, why it happens, and methods to reduce its occurrence.)
Fishman E, Turkheimer E, DeGood DE. Touch relieves stress and pain. J Behav Med 18:69–79, 1995. (This study is one of the few trials of therapeutic touch.)
Fitzgerald FT: Physical diagnosis versus modern technology-A review. West J Med 152;377–382, 1990. (The author presents information about limitations of specific aspects of the physical examination.)
Fox SA, Siu AL, Stein JA: The importance of physician communication on breast cancer screening of older women. Arch Intern Med 154:2058–2068, 1994. (The investigators identified factors related to whether women obtain screening mammography; the physician’s recommendation and enthusiasm for mammography were important variables relating to mammography rate.)
Friedman LC, Nelson DV, Webb JA, el al: Dispositional optimism, self-efficacy, and health beliefs as predictors of breast self-examination. Am J Prev Med 10:130–135, 1994. (The three leading reasons for not performing breast self-examination were “forgetting or too busy,” “fear of finding something,” and “do not know how.”)
Greenberger NJ, Hinthorn DR: History Taking and Physical Examination: Essentials and Clinical Correlates. St. Louis, Mo, Mosby-Year Book, 1993.
Hayward RSA, Steinberg EP, Ford DE, et al: Preventive guidelines: Annals of Internal Medicine 114:758–783, 1991. (The authors present an extensive review and comparison of recommendation from A.C.P., Canadian Task Force, and others.)
Johnson JD, Meischke H: Factors associated with adoption of mammography screening: Results of a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. J Women’s Health 3:97–105, 1994. (Researchers found that the single most influential factor for having a mammogram was a physician’s recommendation.)
Kern DC, Parrino TA, Korst DR: The lasting value of clinical skills. JAMA 254:70–76, 1985. (The authors surveyed graduates and found that practitioners felt that clinical skills, including physical diagnosis abilities, received inadequate emphasis during housestaff training.)
Klachko DM, Reid JC: The effect on medical students of memorizing a physical examination routine. J Med Educ 50:628–630, 1975.(This study documents the utility of memorizing a specific examination sequence.)
Koran LM: The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgements (two parts). N Engl J Med 293:642–646, 695–701, 1975. [In part 1, the author reviews data on interobserver agreement for physical examination aspects; part 2 presents agreement concerning diagnostic procedures (such as electrocardiograms and radiographs).]
Krieger D: The Therapeutic Touch. New York: Simon & Schuster Inc. 1979. (The author is a noted teacher of this skill, and she describes techniques for detecting illness and enhancing a practitioner’s healing abilities.)
Lang F: Resident behaviors during observed pelvic examinations. Fam Med 22:153–155, 1990.
Larsen KM, Smith CK: Assessment of nonverbal communication in the patient physician interviews. J Fam Pract 12:481–488, 1981.
Macklis RM, Mendelson ME, Mudge GH Jr. Introduction to Clinical Medicine: A Student-to-Student Manual. Boston, Little Brown & Co, 1994.
Maclure M, Willett WC: Misinterpretation and misuse of the kappa statistic. Am J Epidemiol 126:161–169, 1987.
Novey DW, Novey D: Rapid Access Guide to Physical Examination. Cicago: Mosby. Year Book, 1998.
Oboler SK, LaForce FM: The periodic physical examination in asymptomatic adults. Ann Intern Med 110:214–226, 1989.
Patton DD, Bodtke S, Horner RD: Patient perceptions of the need for chaperones during the pelvic exams. Fam Med 22:215–231, 1990. (Survey of patients that found about half had no preference concerning an examiner’s gender, and those with a preference, preferred female examiners. With a female examiner, patients did not want a chaperon, and with a male examiner, a chaperon was preferred by approximately 65% of women.)
Penn MA, Bourguet CC: Patients’ attitudes regarding chaperones during physical examinations. J Fam Pract 35:639–643, 1992. [These authors analyzed the effects of patient gender, physician gender and patient age (teenagers versus adults); they found that, although most patients did not care whether a chaperon was present, 29% of adult women and 46% of adolescents preferred a chaperon when examined by a male physician; unlike young women, male teens preferred not to have a chaperon present during the genitourinary examination.]
Robbins JA, Bertrakis KD, Helms LJ, et al: The influence of physician practice behaviors on patient satisfaction. Fam Med 25:17–20, 1993. (These investigators found that being examined was one of the three items that correlated with patient satisfaction.)
Seidel HM, (editor): Mosby’s Guide to Physical Examination. St. Louis, Mo, Mosby-Year Book, 1999.
Sox HC Jr: Preventive health services in adults. N Engl J Med 330:1589–1595, 1994. (Summary of recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, and the American College of Physicians; specific discussions focus on breast, colon, and prostate cancer screening.)
Stratton BF, Nicholson ME, Olsen LK, et al: Breast self-examination proficiency: Attitudinal, demographic, and behavioral characteristics. J Women’s Health 3:185–195, 1994. (Less than a third of women practice breast self-examination, and self-report of skills is not an accurate assessment of a woman’s abilities.)
Swartz MH: Textbook of Physical Diagnosis: History and Examination. Philadelphia, WB Saunders Co, 2001.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: An Assessment of the Effectiveness of 169 Interventions. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins Co, 1989.
Vogt HB, McHale MS: Testicular cancer. Role of primary care physicians in screening and education. Postgrad Med 92:93–101, 1992. (The authors point out that testicular cancer is an illness of young adults and review the role of the physician and self examination in detecting the examinations.
Wallis LA, Tardiff K, Deane K: Evaluation of teaching programs for male and female genital examinations. J Med Educ 58:664–666, 1983.
Weiss L, Meadow R: Women’s attitudes toward the gynecologic practices. Obstet Gynecol 54:110–114, 1979. (Women’s distress is related to anxiety, vulnerability, and humiliation. The authors present specific suggestions for the examiner, including talking to a patient during the examination, allowing patients to change into clothes before discussing findings, and using language that is appropriate for the patient.)
Wiener S, Nathanson M: Physical examination. Frequently observed errors. JAMA 236:852–855, 1976.
Willms JL, Schneiderman H, Algranati PS: Physical Diagnosis: Bedside Evaluation of Diagnosis and Function. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins Co, 1994.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Elliot, D.L., Goldberg, L. (2002). Physical Examination. In: Mengel, M.B., Holleman, W.L., Fields, S.A. (eds) Fundamentals of Clinical Practice. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47565-0_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47565-0_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-306-46692-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47565-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive