Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Ultrasound of the musculoskeletal system is an attractive imaging modality due to the lack of ionising radiation, cost and ease of availability. A role has been established in the shoulder and pediatric hip but not in the knee. Ultrasound studies of the knee performed at six general radiological practices without established musculoskeletal expertise were compared with clinical examination in 56 patients. Final diagnoses were established by arthroscopy and/or MRI. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of superficial lesions in the knee were 88 and 41% for clinical examination and 32 and 59% for ultrasound. For deep lesions sensitivity and specificity were 61 and 64% for clinical examination and 13 and 100% for ultrasound. Ultrasound studies of the knee in a general radiological practice do not offer significant information above clinical examination.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2003.07.006 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!