[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 7, 1923


JAMA. 1923;81(1):1-4. doi:10.1001/jama.1923.02650010005001

Not many years ago, the small surgical staffs, simple diagnostic and therapeutic measures and slow turnover required little management. Case records were largely a matter of memory, or consisted in brief notes. Under present conditions, however, with more active services, larger staffs, and more elaborate and complicated methods, systematization of the work has become essential, in order that time and energy may be conserved, thorough study of cases insured, and complete records made and filed. No service can be excused from making effective efforts toward these ends. The details, however, have not been standardized; therefore, individual experiences are of value, since they further a more general agreement on the proper methods to be employed.

Some years ago, we presented our ideas as to the systematization of a surgical service, and attempted to put the theories into execution.1 Those initial efforts have been persisted in for about eight years. Although