Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J R Soc Med. 1992 Jun;85(6):324-5.

Inappropriate circumcision referrals by GPs.

Author information

1
Bristol Royal Hospital for Sick Children, St Michael's Hill.

Abstract

One hundred and twenty boys were referred by GPs over a 12-month period to a paediatric urologist for circumcision. The reasons for referral were: ballooning in 36, non-retraction in 28, balanoposthitis in 36 or a combination in 15. On examination 53% had a retractile, 21% a partially retractile and 21% a non-retractile foreskin. Six patients had obvious balanitis xerotica obliterans. Only one quarter of the patients required a circumcision. The penis was not examined by the referring doctor in 15 patients. The implications of this survey are that a large proportion of general practitioners have difficulty in discriminating between a true phimosis and a developmentally non-retractile foreskin. This diagnostic inaccuracy was greatest when the referring doctor did not examine the patient.

PMID:
1625262
PMCID:
PMC1293493
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center