[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.211.82.105. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
December 18, 1897

PUERPERAL INFECTION.

Author Affiliations

LOS ANGELES, CAL.

JAMA. 1897;XXIX(25):1257-1259. doi:10.1001/jama.1897.02440510019001f

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

As this does not pretend to be an exhaustive treatise on puerperal fever, so-called, I will make no apology for slighting certain parts of the subject; and if I seem to wander too near the boundary line of the undiscovered, it will not be for the sake of the theorizing, but with the desire to draw, from reasonable inferences, certain conclusions that may assist in our every-day work. In regard to a choice of name for the puerperal condition now under consideration, there is not entire unanimity among medical men. Garrigues objects to the term puerperal fever, principally on the ground of its expressing only a symptom and in exceptional cases not even that, as he states there is sometimes no fever at all. Metria, he thinks too vague, and septicemia too strong a term for mild cases; therefore, he prefers the term "puerperal infection" and while admitting that it

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