The percentage of dermatologic cases in which electricity is used naturally varies with the individual practitioner. One resorts to roentgen rays for acne, while another relies on keratolytics and vaccines; one prefers carbon dioxid snow or trichloracetic acid for certain benign new growths which another treats more confidently with the electric needle or the galvanocautery. The experience of a single observer is, therefore, not conclusive.
While my own records show that 47 per cent, of all office patients receive electrical treatment in some form, it is not claimed that they furnish an index of the ideal. It is not to be expected that there will be constant agreement as to the choice of the electrical agent for a given case, in which any one of several accomplishes the same result, and in which an equivalent effect is possible without recourse to electricity at all.
The principal forms of electricity used
CHIPMAN ED. ELECTRICITY IN DERMATOLOGY. JAMA. 1924;83(13):971–974. doi:10.1001/jama.1924.02660130011004
Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: