Comments for Jeffrey Kirk http://www.jeffreybkirk.com Tue, 07 Dec 2010 01:17:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 Comment on Stress Fracture – Laugh or Cry? by Jeffrey Kirk http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/stress-fracture-laugh-or-cry.html/comment-page-1#comment-64 Jeffrey Kirk Tue, 07 Dec 2010 01:17:54 +0000 http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/?p=53#comment-64 Very interesting. Thanks for the extra info. Taking a look at the links you provided it appears as though the tuning fork should perhaps be the first course of action, because it is may be a better method of positively identifying a stress fracture rather than ruling it out. I just find it interesting that such a low-tech approach is even as reliable as it is. I appreciate your two-cents. Jeff Very interesting. Thanks for the extra info. Taking a look at the links you provided it appears as though the tuning fork should perhaps be the first course of action, because it is may be a better method of positively identifying a stress fracture rather than ruling it out. I just find it interesting that such a low-tech approach is even as reliable as it is. I appreciate your two-cents.

Jeff

]]> Comment on Stress Fracture – Laugh or Cry? by Dr. Aaron http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/stress-fracture-laugh-or-cry.html/comment-page-1#comment-63 Dr. Aaron Mon, 06 Dec 2010 04:37:13 +0000 http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/?p=53#comment-63 Tuning fork tests are controversial, and the limited data suggests that this is NOT a reliable method to rule-out a stress fracture. There seems to be variation based on the frequency of the fork (256Hz seems to be optimal, and 512Hz was the worst), and the degree of pain reported (a very subjective figure, by the way). Regardless, with a sensitivity around 77%, more than 1 in 5 stress fractures could be overlooked with this test. Specificity was around 67%, meaning about 1/3rd of the "positive" tests did not correlate with a real stress fracture. So, if it was my bone, I'd elect for more reliable approaches such as nuclear bone scan, delayed x-ray, or MRI. Just my two-cents. -Dr. A http://www.atshc.com/view.asp?rID=35670 http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2096742 Tuning fork tests are controversial, and the limited data suggests that this is NOT a reliable method to rule-out a stress fracture.

There seems to be variation based on the frequency of the fork (256Hz seems to be optimal, and 512Hz was the worst), and the degree of pain reported (a very subjective figure, by the way).

Regardless, with a sensitivity around 77%, more than 1 in 5 stress fractures could be overlooked with this test.
Specificity was around 67%, meaning about 1/3rd of the “positive” tests did not correlate with a real stress fracture.

So, if it was my bone, I’d elect for more reliable approaches such as nuclear bone scan, delayed x-ray, or MRI.

Just my two-cents.
-Dr. A

http://www.atshc.com/view.asp?rID=35670
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2096742

]]> Comment on Waukesha Hail Storm by chad tindall http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/waukesha-hail-storm.html/comment-page-1#comment-46 chad tindall Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:43:58 +0000 http://www.jeffreybkirk.com/?p=171#comment-46 Where was the damage at in Waukesha I live down town saw nothing. Where was the damage at in Waukesha I live down town saw nothing.

]]>