This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

DANIEL JACKSON, M.D.

AMA Arch Intern Med. 1955;95(6):806-818.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Through the years, since its discovery, the tuberculin test has developed into a valuable means of discovering the trail of persons infected with tubercle bacilli. In spite of many studies of its value, many physicians still neglect the tuberculin test when the differential diagnosis of a pulmonary lesion is considered. The reasons for neglect of the tuberculin test appear to be manifold. First, there seems to be a feeling that "since nearly every adult is tuberculin-positive, there is little reason to do the test." Secondly, newer procedures in diagnosing lesions of the lungs are stressed, such as different positions of roentgenography, bronchoscopy, bronchography, cultures of tubercle bacilli, hemagglutination tests for tuberculosis, and laminography. The physician may become involved in the intricacies of the new tests rather than attempt to evaluate his patient on the basis of tried and true ones. Thirdly, the present-day treatment for tuberculosis has become so simplified, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Houston, Texas

Footnotes
Read before the Southern Chapter of the American College of Chest Physicians, St. Louis, Mo., Nov. 6, 1954.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?