Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
F Fausto Palazzo a Department
of Immunology, St Bartholomew's and Royal London Hospitals Medical
School, London EC1A 7BE, b Anaesthetics, Oxford Deanery, 20 East
Street, Oxford OX2 OAU
Correspondence to: F F Palazzo
F.F.Palazzo{at}qmw.mds.ac.uk
The medical profession is rich with anecdotes about
surgeons, many of national and international repute, using colourful
language in the operating theatre. Legend has it that the language of
the mildest mannered and pious surgeon, once he or she is gowned and gloved, undergoes a transformation. However, a Medline search of the
past 20 years using the search words "swear," "swearing," "foul language," and "blasphemy" produced no relevant articles on the subject.
We therefore assessed to what extent the use of foul language by
surgeons is a myth. We also tried to identify the surgical specialties
where swearing is most common.
One hundred consecutive elective operations under general
anaesthesia performed at a single hospital were assessed for the incidence of swearing by the operating surgeon. Without the surgeon's knowledge a swearing score was kept during surgery. The scoring was
always undertaken by the same person (OJW). Other data recorded comprised the specialty of the surgeon, the length of the operation, and the type of foul language used. The swear words were
classified into three groups, with points assigned to each swear word
to reflect its strength: heaven and hell (such as "God," "bloody
hell," "bugger"), 1 point; bodily products (such as "sh*t," "p*ss"), 2 points; so called four letter words (such as
"f***," "c***," "b***ard") 3 points.
For strings of swear words, the highest scoring obscenity alone was
counted. To guarantee the anonymity of surgeons, no distinction was
made between their grade and sex. The swear rate was calculated from
the total operating time and total scores for each specialty.
The 100 operations from five surgical specialties totalled 80 hours 30 minutes' operating time. Ninety four swearing points were scored, with
an average of one point scored every 51.4 minutes. Different surgical
specialties had different swearing rates (figure). Rates for a typical
eight hour operating day were 16.5 swearing points from the orthopaedic
surgeons and 10.6, 10, and 3.1 from the general surgeons,
gynaecologists, and urologists respectively. In contrast, during eight
hours of ear, nose, and throat surgery, little more than one
"bugger!" is likely (figure).
Surgeons do swear when operating but the rate differs by
specialty. Orthopaedic surgeons on average register one swear point every 29 minutes, almost twice as often as surgeons overall. Although orthopaedic surgeons triumph in the field of foul language, general surgeons are by no means without sin, being only slightly less foul
mouthed than their orthopaedic colleagues. Gynaecologists also seem
anything but angelic but may have been penalised by a small sample size
of operating time. The 95% confidence interval shows that
gynaecologists may actually use more foul language than general
surgeons. Meanwhile the mild mannered ear, nose, and throat surgeons
contribute little, with nearly five hours of operating time on average
without any obscenity.
The reasons for the differential swearing pattern is difficult to
establish. The brevity of the operations in some specialties may be a
determinant. The orthopaedic operations lasted an average of 51.7 minutes, compared with 34.4 minutes per ear, nose, and throat
operation. However, the average gynaecological procedure lasted just
37.2 minutes Given that the operations were elective, this may be the tip of
the iceberg as even more foul language might occur in out of hours
operating. However, the increasing practice of routine surgery
under local and regional anaesthesia may already be enforcing some
restraint of the surgical tongue. Is perhaps 1 January 2000 a good time
for surgeons to resolve to stop swearing in theatre, or should we not
surrender one of the last bastions of surgical tradition and privilege?
![]()
Materials, methods, and results
Top
Materials, methods, and results
Comment

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Rates of swearing during 100 operations, by specialty
![]()
Comment
Top
Materials, methods, and results
Comment
during which time there was nevertheless a good chance of
hearing an expletive. Does the use of complicated orthopaedic tools
encourage bad language in the theatre? Does the good or bad language of
a surgeon lead to a greater or lesser chance of career progression,
depending on the specialty? Unanswered questions for the next millennium.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the surgeons of the Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, for their good natured participation in this study.
Contributors: Both authors collaborated in the design of the study. The data were collected by OJW and analysed by FFP. The paper was written by FFP and revised by OJW. Both authors will act as guarantors.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: None.
Competing interests: None declared.
Read all Rapid Responses