[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
December 8, 1923


Author Affiliations

Associate Clinical Professor of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Urology) Stanford University Medical School; Chief of the Genito-Urinary Department of the San Francisco Polyclinic and Post Graduate School of Medicine; Visiting Urologist, San Francisco County Hospital SAN FRANCISCO

JAMA. 1923;81(23):1917-1924. doi:10.1001/jama.1923.02650230001001

There is at present an unfortunate tendency in many parts of the country to separate urology in women from urology in general, and place it in the hands of the gynecologist and obstetrician. The argument most commonly advanced in favor of this procedure is that the generative and urinary tracts are in close proximity in this sex, and, consequently, pathologic conditions of the two are frequently associated. As a matter of fact, the same intimate relationship exists between the female generative organs and the rectum and colon, but pathologic lesions of these are seldom classed as gynecologic conditions.

In a study of 200 nonpregnant women with urinary disturbances, I found that the symptoms were entirely due to urinary tract conditions in 73 per cent., whereas lesions of the generative organs, although present in a large proportion of cases, were possible etiologic factors in only 27 per cent.

These correspond with

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview