--
Henry Gregor <henrygregor@yahoo.com> wrote:
Anna,some oral history here.
As a resident in the early 80's I had the privilege of meeting an older, still active OB who'd had contact with a Shenandoah Valley (Virginia, USA) who practiced on one side of a valley mountain, and his sister, a pediatrician, practiced on the other side. Said the gentleman carried all his obstetric records in a small pocket notebook, along with the business records which often as not noted chickens, eggs or produce or perhaps some actual cash.
Turns out the tax service called to audit his business records one day, and ...I would have loved to have observed the scene...upon being asked for his business records, he pulled the notebook out of his vest pocket and handed it over.
Hank
"Anna Meenan, MD" <annam@uic.edu> wrote:
I have a book called "Obstetrical Tchnique" by Joseph M. Cooke, MD,
dated 1902. According to Dr. Cooke, prenatal care in 1902 in New York
consisted of:
1. An initial History and physical
2. Mom drops off a urine specimen to check for protein every week.
3. A visit with doc at about 32 weeks, preferably at mom's house, at
which time the BP is checked, the fundus is measured, manual pelvimetry
is done, and FHT's auscultated, with no mention of a specific fetoscope.
4. Mom sends for doc when in labor. Neither stethoscope nor fetoscope
is listed among the equipment in delivery kit, and no mention of
auscultation of FHT's during labor at all.
I love reading obstetrical history.
Anna Meenan, MD
At Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Cheri Van Hoover wrote:
>
>Braun, R. Daniel wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that an advertisem! ent sets the standard for spelling.
>> Anybody got a good medical reference?
>
>I've always seen it spelled fetoscope, but wasn't sure where, so I went
>and did a quick search of my library.
>
>All editions of Varney's Midwifery (the American midwifery "bible")
>spell it fetoscope.
>
>Midwifery: Community Based Care Durning the Childbearing Year by Linda
>Walsh also spells it fetoscope.
>
>When I go back to my vintage and antique books, references to even
>bothering to listen to FHTs become more rare. Mayes Handbook of
>Midwifery (1967) recommends the use of a binaural or Pinard stethoscope.
> Playfair's System of Midwifery (1889) makes reference to the use of a
>stethoscope and cites the work of one individual who claimed to be able
>to hear FHTs prior to 11 weeks gestation by doing "vaginal stethoscopy."
> They say that is rarely done for obvious reasons. Bedford's
>Principles and Practice of Obstetrics from 1861 mentions the use of a
>stethoscope. I looked briefly in some obstetrical books dating to
>1905-1940 and was unable to find any mention of a device other than a
>stethoscope, though a specially modified stethoscope with fitted
>headpiece was identified in DeLee and named after a couple of people. I
>didn't write down their names.
>
>So it may be that fetoscope is a word more commonly employed in the
>midwifery community. I don't know why it's spelled with an "o".
>
>I used to use one routinely until I wore out the tubing of mine and
>never got around to replacing it. I did find it very useful, especially
>as a less experienced practitioner, for helping in the exact
>localization of the fetal heart (giving more information about lie and
>position). I found that it helped improve my skill at Leopold's to have
>that additional information.
>
>--
>Cheri Van Hoover, CNM, MS
>Faculty
>Midwifery Institute at Philadelphia University
>
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
