Talk:Homans sign

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chiropractic Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chiropractic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chiropractic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChiropracticWikipedia:WikiProject ChiropracticTemplate:WikiProject ChiropracticChiropractic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Incorrect description of test

I am a RPN student in Ontario. Can someone please double check the procedure described in this article. I disagree with it, the knee should be extended rather than 90 degrees flexed. Thanks ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.49.182.126 (talk) 00:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misstated date of key citation

Also the Shafer article from Angiology is from 1971, not 1980. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.240.11.216 (talk) 11:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of this day

[Call for expert attention.] The article as a whole is incompletely or weakly sourced, and the closing unsourced paragraphs present potentially injurious information. For these reasons, and for the generally dated and weak presentation of information, I called for an expert to decide whether the content is adequate for this DVT-related article—a malady that is easily misdiagnosed, and potentially life threatening—and then to take the lead in providing better sources in support of the content. I provided a recent review in Further reading, which makes clear the type of Doppler ultrasound that was, as of its publication date (1998), the best diagnostic procedure to follow. An expert needs to take it the matter further from here.

Also, I removed negative mention of Doppler (sole mention) as absent further info ration such a mention is highly misleading as to the role of Doppler ultrasound, and because in general, drawing medical conclusions without citation is unacceptable. I also reordered the penultimate sentence to place the sourced component first, out of a sense of caution. Finally, noted that the D-dimer description is dubious, both because it is poorly sourced, and it is at odds with content in the abstract of Baker (1998), see Further reading.

Finally, please also default hide content of box that is appended, which is only tangentially relevant, as large as the whole article, and so unnecessarily distracting.

Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 06:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite of article

I rewrote the article based on the previous edit's concerns, including always valid sources. Regarding diagnostic procedures (Doppler ultrasound and D-Dimers), I think it's better to refer to the main DVT article and to the articles of the respective procedures - as such, I have removed the previous statements.

Regarding the possible health risks of eliciting the Homans' sign, I have only seen such statement in one of UpToDate's DVT pages (quoted in the article): "There is also the mistaken belief that eliciting Homans sign is dangerous; this concern is based upon a single case of pulmonary thromboembolism following calf pressure during a Doppler examination." Although UpToDate is a reliable source, there is no source available for the "single case" the article mentions. As such, and considering that Oxford's Handbook of Clinical Surgery mentions that Homans' sign should NOT be elicited (their emphasis, not mine), I have chosen to indicate in this article that some concern about possible risks of eliciting this sign may exist.

--Regardmore (talk) 22:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]