Clinical Decision Manual

From The Critics

Reviewer: Donald R. Frey, MD(Creighton University Medical Center)
Description: This is the fourth edition of this concise medical management tool that is composed of extensive algorithms found in the main text. References for each table or algorithm are described in terms of their level of evidence.
Purpose: The manual is designed to provide the most recent, evidence-based decision making tools for the busy practitioner. Given the rapid expansion of evidence-based studies, to have such information available in algorithmic protocols is indeed refreshing.
Audience: Although designed for the busy clinician, medical students and residents will find it useful as a review instrument and study tool. The author is a noted cardiologist and medical educator, who has selected the manual's algorithims and protocols from the huge number available in the larger text.
Features: The book is divided on the basis of medical subspecialties — e.g., cardiology, nephrology, etc. Each treatment and/or diagnostic protocol is clearly delineated, usually in algorithm fashion. Every guideline is referenced as to the level of its clinical evidence, and when available, the substantiating study is cited. Although the sparse text of the manual allows a great deal of algorthmic information to be provided, some readers may have difficulty navigating the book's stripped down format.
Assessment: This manual does an excellent job of condensing the wealth of algorithms found in the larger Kelley's text into a portable manual. As such, it is a guide to the thought process involved in medical decision making. However, it does not function as well as a step-by-step walk through of acute medical problems, such as one might find with the Washington University Manual, and should not be viewed as a substitute. Rather, its strength lies in its ability to guide the work-up of complex medical patients.

Booknews

A pocket reference providing algorithms that serve as step-by-step guides for the management of 120 common clinical problems in cardiology, gastroenterology, nephrology, infectious diseases, and other areas. The tables are graded according to the level of scientific evidence that underlies them to provide guidance on how much confidence to place in them; category A tables are based on national guidelines or highly robust clinical trials, while category C guides are based primarily on expert consensus. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)

3 Stars from Doody