[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 5, 1941


Author Affiliations

Pasadena, Calif.

JAMA. 1941;117(1):21. doi:10.1001/jama.1941.72820270002007b

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


The accompanying illustration obviously explains the principle of the gown to be described. It is nothing more or less than a surgical gown patterned after a carpenter's apron. The first point of importance which occurred to me and which likewise will occur to the reader is the possibility of contamination of the instruments placed in the various pockets of the gown. In order to safeguard this point I have a triple thickness of material behind the pockets. After an experience of two years I find this to be ample. To those who might question the efficacy of this, an apron of either cellophane or thin rubber may be used to protect the cloth from the perspiration of the operator. To any objection which might be raised as to any discomfort occasioned by having the extra layers of cloth in back of the pockets I might add that it represents such

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