Linked Life Data

2036926

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/2036926

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
6
pubmed:dateCreated
1991-7-1
pubmed:abstractText
Survey forms were sent to all members of the Coloproctology Section of the Royal Society of Medicine and the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons to obtain their opinions of the availability, actual use, and perceived helpfulness of different methods for the evaluation of the physiology of the colon and rectum. Responses revealed a similarity in age and practice patterns in both groups. Of the 19 methods surveyed, greater than 90 percent of respondents in both groups rely on three traditional methods of patient evaluation: patient history, digital examination, and sigmoidoscopy. Four other methods have gained acceptance by the majority of respondents in both groups: colon transit studies, defecography, perfused-catheter manometry, and rectal compliance. The three methods ranked lowest in availability, actual use, and helpfulness by both groups were single-fiber electromyography, use of a perineometer, and evoked potential studies. Our study provides a baseline for future surveys on the investigative efforts of physicians studying the physiology of the colon, rectum, and anus.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jun
pubmed:issn
0012-3706
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
34
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
464-8
pubmed:dateRevised
2005-11-17
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1991
pubmed:articleTitle
Anorectal physiology testing. A survey of availability and use.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Lahey Clinic Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts 01805.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article