What is clinical anatomy?

Abstract

In our Journal's first issue, published in 1988, by Drs. Ralph Ger (Fig. 1) and R.J. Scothorne (Fig. 2), the authors consider the definition of “clinical anatomy” and whether or not such a topic deserves a new journal or not. I encourage our readership to read this interesting historical editorial. The authors launched the journal with the notion that the Journal would be dedicated to the “dissemination of new knowledge of all aspects of anatomy of relevance to clinical science and practice.” Almost three decades later, our Journal continues to flourish and expand its borders but has continued along the same primary pathway that our founders planned out. Our readership and number of submissions are at all-time highs both facts speaking to the answer to Drs. Ger and Scothorne's original question of whether or not a journal devoted to clinical anatomy is necessary. The authors rightfully point out that “traditionally, most professional anatomists were clinically trained, and their teaching and research were often oriented toward human structure in relation to medicine” (Ger and Scothorne, 1988). They also mention in their editorial (three decades ago) that there has been a “continuing and now accelerating decline” in clinically qualified anatomists. This latter problem has yet to be remedied. Dr. Ralph Ger. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com] Dr. R.J. Scothorne. In this issue, the editors of Clinical Anatomy present to our readership an issue full of exciting and pertinent papers in our field. These include description of the so-called gastropancreatic ligament, variation of the inframammary fold, reviews of episotomy, central nervous system control of micturition, and conjoined twins. A recent “hot topic” in the media, a timely viewpoint by Dr. Paul Neumann of what constitutes an organ is included in this issue. On a sad note, a memorial to Dr. Donald Cahill, a former editor-in-chief of the Journal, is found within.