Does it matter which BRS Physio edition I have?

[wcec]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I know that BRS physio is a mainstay of Step 1 studying -- but is the most recent edition (4th) much better than the 3rd edition (which is the one I currently own)? I also own the large Costanzo Physiology paperback book, with the purple & blue cover, but I worry that it's too long for me to read through once -- although the times that I have used it for reference, I've found it to be very helpful.

Any thoughts/advice on whether it would be a good idea to buy the BRS Physio 4th edition?

Thanks very much in advance for your help.

 

[Fit-Doc]

dont waste your money....stick with 3 the info is the same...the only difference is that some of the diagrams in 4 are in color and some of them have been changed but still contain the same info. As a matter of fact 3 has more pages than 4. Dont worry you arent missing anything

 

[wcec]

Thanks, hugo! Unfortunately, i made a mistake and i actually have the 2nd edition, from way back in 1998! Any thoughts on if this edition is good enough?

 

[Knicks]

Is there an errata sheet for the 3rd edition?

 

[Helo]

no, old one is fine, i used it...

 

[Instatewaiter]

Is there an errata sheet for the 3rd edition?

Yes there is

no, old one is fine, i used it...

Dr Costanzo runs our board review so we went through both the 3rd and 4th editions with Dr C during our formal board review. It is surprising what is left out of the 3rd edition. It is not just color v not color, there is a lot more pertinent info in the 4th edition. While the major stuff is in both, there are some key diagrams that are just not in the 3rd edition that are in the 4th.

To to the OP since you already have the BRS phys it's not a huge deal but for those of you deciding which to buy, I would opt for the 4th edition.

 

[Knicks]

Yes there is

Good to know.


Could you please post it here, or at least the link to it?

 

[Knicks]

^^ bump? anyone?

 

[Instatewaiter]

BRS Physiology, Third Edition -- errata:

1. p. 16, C.1.b. An action potential in a presynatpci cell is INsufficient...

2. p. 37, B, first point. After Adrenergic Neurons, delete "whether in the sympathetic or parasympathetic nervous system.

3. p. 222, 1. Under Mechanism of slow wave production. Delete "is the cyclic activation and deactivation of the cell membrane Na-K pump. Instead, it should read: "is the cyclic opening of Ca channels (depolarization), followed by opening of K channels (repolarization)."

4. P. 256, Figs 7-2 and 7-3. Should be GDP --> GTP

5. p. 276, e. (2), Should read increased mineralocorticoic levels (not aldosterone)

 

[Instatewaiter]

BRS Physiology, 4th edition, errata:

p. 111, Question 57. Change choice (C) from angiotensin II to angiotensinogen. Also adjust explanation.

p. 134, D, 1. Under "where" list, the last entry should be PaO2 (arterial PO2)

p. 139, Fig 4-12. V/Q for pulmonary embolus shoudl be infinity

 

[Knicks]

BRS Physiology, Third Edition -- errata:

1. p. 16, C.1.b. An action potential in a presynatpci cell is INsufficient...

2. p. 37, B, first point. After Adrenergic Neurons, delete "whether in the sympathetic or parasympathetic nervous system.

3. p. 222, 1. Under Mechanism of slow wave production. Delete "is the cyclic activation and deactivation of the cell membrane Na-K pump. Instead, it should read: "is the cyclic opening of Ca channels (depolarization), followed by opening of K channels (repolarization)."

4. P. 256, Figs 7-2 and 7-3. Should be GDP --> GTP

5. p. 276, e. (2), Should read increased mineralocorticoic levels (not aldosterone)

That's it? Nice.


Thanks.


EDIT: Are there more?

 

[osli]

I found a lot more places in the 4th ed. where I was very suspicious of it being a mistake (or perhaps just worded poorly). Unfortunately I didn't mark them or write them down... I just made a mental note to look them up elsewhere later in the day. And now I don't remember a single one. 🙁

 

[mudphudwannabe]

I used the 2nd edition last year, and it was just fine. Basic knowledge of physiology hasn't really changed much in the last 10 years, I guess, at least at the level we need to understand. 😉

 

[Docster]

personally, i preferred the 4th ed. i left my 3rd ed lying around in the hospital one day and came back 30 min later and it was gone 😡

while i couldn't compare the 3rd and 4th ed side by side, it seemed to me that the 4th ed had more pathophys integration as well as pharm.