London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Croydon 1967

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Croydon]

This page requires JavaScript

44
CHIROPODY
The system of using the services of approved chiropodists working
in their own surgeries was continued and attendances rose steadily.
Satisfactory reports on the premises and mode of practice of all chiropodists
in the scheme were received from the Corporation's visiting specialist.
Domiciliary treatment was also included, but the fees came out of the
financial allocation allowed to each practitioner. It was thus left to individual
chiropodists to decide how they allocated services within their
global budgets.
The scheme covers elderly persons, expectant mothers and the
permanently handicapped.
It has proved a successful and popular service, and requests for
increases were limited only by financial consideration. In one area, New
Addington, the complete absence of any private chiropodist' s surgery
necessitated the provision of a Corporation clinic, and the engagement
of a partrtime chiropodist for 2 sessions a week. Similar facilities were
provided at the "Waylands" Training Centre where up to 100 physically
handicapped persons may attend each day and many need chiropody.
On December 31st 1967, 26 chiropodists were operating this scheme.
During the period January 1st to December 31st 1967, they gave 19,291
treatments at their surgeries and 4,266 by domiciliary visits. 252 treat
ments were given at Parkway Clinic, New Addington and 63 at "Waylands".
CERVICAL CYTOLOGY
This service remained limited by the facilities available at the Special
Regional Hospital Board Laboratory. A maximum of 40 specimens a week
was allowed and easily covered by medical and nursing staff in Corporation
clinics. The Ministry of Health directed local authorities to offer the test
to women over 35 years of age and since the risk of developing cancer increases
with age, it is reasonable to give this priority when facilities are
limited and it is debatable whether testing from 25 years of age is justified.
However, the publicity about cervical smear testing resulted in many aplications
from younger women, and despite re-assurances several were concerned
at being refused on grounds of age. If new laboratory methods
allow unlimited numbers of specimens to be examined, our problem will
become the persuasion of those with the greatest risk to undergo testing.
For details see Appendix page 122.