We'd still need surgeons until the robots are good enough. We'd need radiologists until they can add decent computer vision. Ditto for pathologists and other vision-intensive specialties. Orthopods are very hands-on and collect information through channels other than words. So there's a suite spot in the spectrum of doctors for something like Watson. I'd wonder about the ability to ask questions and ferret out socially-obvious problems like broken arms from abuse if Watson were a first provider.
Presumably you'd couple something like Watson with a world-savvy human physician assistant that acts as its eyes, ears, and touch.
To the extent that abuse is a medical diagnosis, it would be trivial for a computer to make that presumptive diagnosis. In fact, if Watson is truly performing at the level of an M2, it probably already can.
Actually, I'd think the first signs of abuse would be the most difficult things for a computer to diagnose. Excuses are given, nobody says anything about violence, the person slipped, but the non-verbal cues might raise a red flag.
I'm not sure how much common sense world knowledge would be in Watson. "Hey doc, I got a pain in my chest while watching the football game vs Cal at Memorial Stadium." The DDX might include angina despite the computer being unlikely to know about a fan's emotions or environment of a football game.
Presumably you'd couple something like Watson with a world-savvy human physician assistant that acts as its eyes, ears, and touch.