16,715
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Phimosis diagnosis issues: Add text and citation.
|accessdate=2021-09-05
}}</ref>
Several papers critical of phimosis diagnosis practice in the UK were published in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Rickwood & Walker (1989) reported that in the Mersey region (northwest England) "many boys are circumcised for development non-retractability of the prepuce rather than for true phimosis and that in consequence some two-thirds of the operations are unnecessary."<ref name="rickwood1989">{{REFjournal
|last=Rickwood
}}</ref>
In defence of the much criticised British GPs, it should be stated that the data they were provided by Douglas Gairdner regarding development of foreskin retractability was very inaccurate, however this was not known at the time.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=Denniston
|first=George C.
|author-link=George C. Denniston
|init=GC
|last2=Hill
|first2=George
|init2=G
|author2-link=George Hill
|title=Gairdner was wrong.
|journal=Can Fam Physician
|date=2010-10
|volume=56
|issue=10
|pages=986-7
|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2954072/
|quote=
|pubmedID=20944034
|pubmedCID=2954072
|DOI=
|accessdate=2021-09-05
}}</ref>
{{REF}}
[[Category:UK]]