Doctors Differ On Use Of Anaesthetic

Chronicle (Levin), 19 March 1948, Page 7

Doctors Differ On Use Of Anaesthetic

• r i AUCKLAND, Mareh 18. .The claim for damag.es amountiiig tu £4000 brought agaiiist the Aiucitiaud Hospital Board (Mr. V. R. Meyedith an.d Mr. G. D. Speight) by tlie' Publie . Trustee .on beliaK pf the widovv • atiu uhild of George Vietor Landiiands who died on ..the opcrafcing table at ' tli. ' Auckland Hospjtul ari May 8, 10 10 was eonti.nued befor.e Mr, Jumiee B'air and. a speeial jury in the Supreme Coun ; The elaimants are Mrs. Jauet Donaldson Handilands ancl Maiy Ann Amelia Ban . dilandSghis infaiit (laughter. - ' Deceased Was admiiled to the Auek land Hospital for a nasal operuiion dur ing whieh he died. Plaintiff ciaime-.i that ehloroform and adrenalin had been used in 'conibination. Dr. A. N. Slater, senior anaesthetisi at the Wellington Hospital, said he had never seen adrenalin used when chloro forni or ehloroform and ether vvas used in an anaesthetie. In liis opiniou deatu in this case was due to veiUriculaf , librillation indueed by the conibiiied use of ehloroform and adrenalin. The text books whieh he had used did not ap prove Of' tlie eombination and in man^ eases it was condemned. Dr. Harold- Bington, retired mcdieai practitioner of London, said he v\ as on holiday in New Zealand. He was a mem ber of the Royal College of Burgeons and held a licentiate of the Royal College of Physieiaus..- In 193S) he vvas president of the anaesthetie seetion of the Royal Society of Medicine whieh wathe father of all similar societies. Wif uess said that in Scotiand, the liome oi ehloroform it surviveJ the depression oi the drug in England. However, it had been used less and less in Seotland ex cept in eountry places. He had not seen if administered at the Royal Inlirmarv in Edinburgli. Witness empliasised that in' the administi'ation of chlor-oforni apart f'rom an overdose there was -a danger of ventrieular librillation oceurring with The patient during the hiduc tion period or that of light anaesthesia. It was a corroborated faet that the administering of adrenalin uuder the ei feet of ehloroform endangered thq life of a patient. " Opening the ease for defendant Mr. Alercdith saiel the care. vvas a eiaiui for damages involving allegtul negiigeiict at the Aueklaml Hospital. Jt. was not a matter of deeiding the merits oi ehloroform and other anaesthetics in the ear, nose and throat department. L'here was a definite system for performing operations under a specilit anaesthetie. It was a mixture of xvhloro- '• form'and ether, agd in thi^f casju-a -sinai I injeetioii of- adrenalin was'.. ina.de.. Evi- - deuee would be given to show that the . surgeon' (Dr. Bon ie) was a ebnipetenU^ man ahd: was usmg a staudafd reeog : ' uised teehnique. Two of the most ex pert pathplogists in New Zealand would be ealle'd, Dr. Gilrnour, formerlv -of the Auekland t-Iespital," and Dr. Lvneh, oi vVellington. 'Dr. Gilmour woulcl sa\ there was nothijug in the heart of de

ceased to show venl ncular li.bri ilatiou Ilewould be snpported in that. view by I Dr. Lyneh. ■ Dr. Ada Piatts-.Mills, of Auckland, said she vvas a visiting part-time anaesth-etist at the Auckland Hospital. ohe had given some thousands o; anaesthetics and . administered that to '• j B and i hinds. Bhe examiiiml him before 1 the operation aiul knew he had a his- j tory oDrheumatie fever. There was j also a systolie niurmur in the heart: j The anaesthetie used vvas ehloroforiti | and ether followed by pure ether. Dr. | Borrie paeked the patient \s nose with | adrenalin and lnjected an adrenalin | soJution into the mueous membi'ane.e. | Ihe surgeon was in favour of the I •hloroform-ether eomliination and siie i had seen him inject adrenalin vvhenevei | he performed that operation. Witness ! had heard of the eouibination of chloro- i form and adrenalin deseribed as unde- | sirable, but she had not seen an acei- | dent with it. -|