Alice, can we discuss this further? I dont know what the last sentence means in your response. I am so glad you posted about this. It makes absolute sense about the stopping to rest and I HAVE been told to do that so I can make ti turn out better as that is what they want! They want me to keep improving after the first one. To me that never made sense as I generally go down hill after the first. I have just gotten used to that except for one tech who was the first one to say this looks like MG, they dont know the disease and they have one goal. Many times I put the machines into red flags because I just cant even register the right number that make sense so the computer says that 'it cant compute'! I so wish I had the money to go back to nice Pulmo I had at Mayo who found I had the paralysis in my diaphgram.
Annie59
Quote:
Originally Posted by alice md
Annie,
I briefly went over your link.
This was clearly written by someone who has no understanding of MG.
The following sentence shows where many errors in understanding PFTs of MG patients come from-
So, you have a patient in which the VC significantly drops after a few efforts. what do you do? you let the patient rest, and then repeat it again.
This is exactly how you are going to miss significant respiratory muscle involvement of myasthenia!
Further more, even in patients with lung diseases or asthma, there are studies that show an element of respiratory muscle involvement, so their low results may also be real, and explain why it is so common.
In medicine, you can't carve order by leaving the disorderly parts out. This is a fertile source for serious clinical errors.
|