Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:22:22.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Investigation of the Bacterial Content of the Urine in Normal Pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Muriel Barton Hall
Affiliation:
(John W. Garret International Fellow in Bacteriology, Liverpool University.)
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.

Comparatively little work has been published upon the bacteriological investigation of the urine in the healthy woman either normally or during pregnancy and the puerperium, and the findings in such work as has been published are contradictory. In 1912, Leith Murray, Stenhouse Williams and A. J. Wallace, working together upon the coliform organisms in the female urinary tract, came to the conclusion that typical Bacillus coli is found in a considerable percentage of all female urines taken under conditions precluding all sources of contamination, and that ordinarily they have no apparent pathological significance. John Hewitt, in 1923, published a report upon 34 cases of urinary infection during pregnancy and the puerperium. He agreed with Leith Murray and other workers who had quoted figures to show that healthy pregnant women may have B. coli in the urine in the absence of pus cells.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1930

References

REFERENCES

Browne, F. J. (1926). Brit. Med. J. 1, 683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danforth, (1916). Surg. Gynec. and Obstet. 22, 723.Google Scholar
Gough, (1923). J. Obstet. and Gynec. 30, 102.Google Scholar
Hewitt, (1923). J. Obstet. and Gynec. 30, 390.Google Scholar
Murray, L., Williams, S. and Wallace, A. J. (1912). J. Obstet. and Gynec. 22, 65.Google Scholar