Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T13:44:03.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of Richardson's verification test in the sero-diagnosis of syphilis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

G. Fulton Roberts  and
J. Swale
G. Fulton Roberts
Affiliation:
From the R.A.F. Institute of Pathology, Halton
J. Swale
Affiliation:
From the R.A.F. Institute of Pathology, Halton
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The importance of the accuracy of serological tests for syphilis has become more than ever emphasized by widespread testing and more efficient therapy. The problems are reviewed in the light of present knowledge of the specificity and sensitivity of standard serological tests for syphilis. Richardson's modification of the Wassermann reaction is described. The results of this test when applied to ninety-two cases giving doubtful or discrepant reactions by routine tests are presented and classified. The cases were followed up clinically. The results indicate that this simple test is a reliable and valuable adjunct to routine methods, and should be employed widely as a verification procedure.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , November 1949 , pp. 263 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1949

References

REFERENCES

Barnett, C. W., Jones, R. B. & Kulchar, G. V. (1935). Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol., N.Y., 33, 214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, S. W. (1947). Amer. J. Syph. 31, 225.Google Scholar
Berger, F. M. & Denton, G. (1944). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 20, 118.Google Scholar
Berger, F. M. & Sutherland, P. L. (1944). J. Path. Bact. 56, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cernovodeanu, P. & Henri, V. (1906). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 60, 571.Google Scholar
Colquhoun, D. B., Kyles, W. B. & Rannie, I. (1945). J. Path. Bact. 57, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, B. D. (1944). Medicine, Baltimore, 23, 359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyer, G. & Ward, H. K. (1923). Spec. Rep. Med. Res. Goun., Lond., no. 78, H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Eagle, H. (1941). Amer. J. Syph. 25, 7.Google Scholar
Endicott, L. (1927). Vener. Dis. Inform. 8, 490.Google Scholar
Fairbrother, R. W. (1933). Lancet. 2, 590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenbaum, S. S. & Yagle, E. (1926). J. Amer. Med. Ass. 87,318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, L. W. & Osmond, T. E. (1943). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 19, 108.Google Scholar
Hartmann, O. & Sohøne, R. (1943). Acta Med. Scand. 114,236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hecht, H. (1921). Dtsch. Med. Wschr. 47, 1487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heggie, R. M., Maguire, J. G., Bull, M. M. & Heggie, J. F. (1947). Lancet. 1, 588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinkleman, A. J. (1927). Amer. J. Syph. 11, 594.Google Scholar
Hodel, G. H. (1942). Vener. Dis. Inform. 23, 215.Google Scholar
Hole, N. H. & Coombs, R. R. A. (1947). J. Hyg., Camb. 45, 480.Google Scholar
Jennison, R. F., Penfold, J. B. & Roberts, J. A. F. (1949). J. Glin. Path. 2, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, J. W. & Dolce, F. H. (1946). Arch. Derm. Syph. 54, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, R. L. (1940). Arch. Derm. Syph. 41, 817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, R. L. (1943). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 28, 1175.Google Scholar
Kelogg, W. H. & Wells, L. A. (1926). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 12, 153.Google Scholar
Kolmer, J. A. (1944). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth. 34, 510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
League of Nations (1932). Quart. Bull. Hlth Org. L.o.N. 1,712.Google Scholar
Lund, H. (1942). Amer. J. Syph. 26, 1.Google Scholar
Malloy, A. M. & Kahn, R. L. (1931). J. Infect. Dis. 48, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, M. M., Osler, A. G., Bier, O. G. & Heidel-Berger, M. (1946). J. Exp. Med. 84, 535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohr, C. F., Moore, J. E. & Eagle, H. (1941). Arch. Intern. Med. 68, 898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, J. E., Eagle, H. & Mohr, C. F. (1940). J. Amer. Med. Ass. 115, 1602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nigg, C. & Larsen, R. N. (1928). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 13, 843.Google Scholar
Price, O. (1948). J. Clin. Path. 1, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rein, C. R. & Elsberg, E. S. (1944). Amer. J. Clin. Path. 14, 461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rein, C. R. & Elsberg, E. S. (1945). J. Invest. Dermat. 6, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, G. H. (1940). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 16, 166.Google Scholar
Rytz, F. (1942). Amer. J. Clin. Path. 12, 166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sachs, H. (1942). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 18, 96.Google Scholar
Sherwood, N. P., Bond, G. C. & Canuteson, R. I. (1941). Amer. J. Syph. 25, 179.Google Scholar
Stokes, J. H., Boerner, F., Hitchens, A. P. & Nemsler, S. (1946). J. Amer. Med. Ass. 130, 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, B. J. (1947). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 23, 61.Google Scholar
Vaughan, A. C. T. (1947). Brit. J. Vener. Dis. 23, 77.Google Scholar
Vogelsang, T. M. (1946). Acta Med. Scand. 124, 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wassermann, A. V. (1921). Berl. klin. Wschr. 58, 193.Google Scholar
Webb, E. L. (1936). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 22, 184.Google Scholar
Weil, A. J. (1941). Bact. Rev. 5, 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witebsky, E. (1938). Arch. Path. 26, 1083.Google Scholar
Wyler, E. J. (1929). Spec. Rep. Med. Res. Coun., Lond., no. 129, H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Wyler, E. J. (1932). Rep. Minist. Hlth., Lond., no. 67, H.M.S.O.Google Scholar