When I was a kid (1950s) it seemed like every time I was taken to the doctor for some ailment, I got stuck in a finger to draw a drop or two of blood. Later they started sticking an earlobe to get the drops.

Now much, much later I’ve been wondering why that was. What blood test would have been possible with such a small amount that would have been of value if someone had something like measles or chicken pox or something else?

(And do they still do that to children?)

I have no idea. But then my training was in the 20th century.

Wow, that is a very vague memory for me, I can hardly remember it. Maybe I'm just imagining it, it's very vague. You may be older than me if it was a regular thing for you, otherwise I may have remembered it more easily. Thinking about it I can't imagine what kind of silly test that could possibly have been. Maybe just a way for the Doctor to increase a little bogus billing back in the day for some disease that was otherwise very uncommon.

Most of the time I saw a doctor in those days it was at a military dispensary, so they wouldn't have been doing it for billing. The main reason I remember it was because it HURT! to get stuck in one’s small fingers as a kid, and I swear that the nurses who did it were fantasizing about bayonetting a Nazi or something.

Later when I got over the terror of a blood draw with needle from a vein, that was actually less painful and traumatic than the finger jab.

Puzzling.

And yes, I am getting up there.

Could have been for two reasons among several; to get a hematocrit and hemoglobin levels, or to make a slide for red blood cell morphology, white blood cell count, etc. The hemoglobin test is what the Red Cross would perform prior to you donating blood for example. Before all of the whiz-bang auto-analyzer technologies for hematology tests that was how it was done.

Glucose level. Finger stick on regent strip.

Before there were coagulation tests (PT, APTT), they could get an idea of how well your clotting mechanism worked from a blood clotting test. You got a finger stick and it was periodically dabbed with a piece of filter paper; it was noted how long it took to stop bleeding.

They were still occasionally used in the 70's when I was a lab tech for a few years.
I actually did a couple, since the old-timer docs back then would still order them.

Some other tests can actually be done on the blood collected from a fingerstick.
We had to resort to that when the patient's veins were shot and we couldn't do a regular venipuncture.

Yes, no checking to see how long it took to stop bleeding.
And we never heard about glucose levels in those days, at least not in children. Perhaps that was a reason, but it seems unlikely.

When were glucose test strips invented?
Answered: According to the 'net, it was in 1965 and I was in the Army by then.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Yes, no checking to see how long it took to stop bleeding.
And we never heard about glucose levels in those days, at least not in children. Perhaps that was a reason, but it seems unlikely.

I was adding to my post as you typed.

Kids can be hard to draw blood from, and it's just easier to do the fingerstick.
There are a number of tests that can be done with a single drop of blood.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
I have no idea. But then my training was in the 20th century.

I’m guessing, then, that you weren’t familiar with how Army lab techs* in the ’60s would decide if a hypodermic needle needed replacing or could be reused (after sterilizing, of course), and why needle work in those days was much more painful than today.

* The conscientious ones, at least.

Thanks for the other responses. I assumed there were some reason(s), but it was never clear even after I learned much more about the general subject years later.

During your time, they also thought blood-letting was a valid procedure.

I remember getting stuck, but I remember the blood being wicked with a small glass hollow stick.

quote:

Originally posted by Lineman101:
I remember getting stuck, but I remember the blood being wicked with a small glass hollow stick.

Yes. The lancet was packaged and manually stuck into the finger. A capillary tube was used to draw up the drop.

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
During your time, they also thought blood-letting was a valid procedure.

It’s not‽

quote:

Originally posted by Lineman101:
I remember getting stuck, but I remember the blood being wicked with a small glass hollow stick.

Ah: Something new for me.

I remember this from when I was young. With a finger stick, they would fill a glass tube about 5" long. I'm pretty sure they then put it in something and spun the tubes around. You could sometimes see where the nurse did this.

No idea what they were testing but I do wonder now. I don't remember if this was for a normal yearly visit or when we were sick.

I remember this from the early 1970's. I have no idea what the test was for.

quote:

Originally posted by Lineman101:
I remember getting stuck, but I remember the blood being wicked with a small glass hollow stick.

quote:

Originally posted by SgtGold:
I remember this from the early 1970's. I have no idea what the test was for.

quote:

Originally posted by Lineman101:
I remember getting stuck, but I remember the blood being wicked with a small glass hollow stick.

That would be the percentage of blood that is red blood cells - called the Hematocrit.

Elizabeth Holmes is doing Federal time as she tried to convince the powers that be, that only a finger prick of blood was needed.

To test for elf blood?

If enough blood were drawn up with a pipette that it could be put in a centrifuge, then they were testing the hematocrit: the percent of blood that is red blood cells. That's easy to do with ancient instruments like that.
No fingerstick glucose tests for sure.
Possible they were doing blood counts on a slide, but I doubt it.