HOSPITAL INQUIRY.

Hokitika Guardian, 6 March 1924, Page 1

HOSPITAL INQUIRY.

A UCKLAND COMMISSION. FURTHER EVIDENCE BY DOCTORS. BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSN., COPYRIGHT. AUCKLAND, March 4. In the Maternity Home inquiry the (•l.’airman, Mr Karl K.C., said the Commission had heard all it ivantod to hear of an educational and scientific nature, and were quite able to deal with the streptococci and cocci featoies. An attack bad been made ou the Kelvin Hospital matron and certain dm tors. The Commission wanted tlie fuels against those attacked. After to-morrow afternoon it would be impossible for Sir Donald M’Gnvin and Dr Elliott to attend and he, as chairman, veuld take anything that counsel wished to bring forward. .Mr Leary, representing Drs Williams, Al.bott, and YPCorniiek, submitted that the unusual prevalence of an epidemic was responsible for the eases of septicaemia. The Commission would have

Le consider tlie unimpeachable eliarrcter of the medical men concerned, and the fact that Kelvin Hospital had been carefully and successfully conducted for a. long period before any deaths had occurred. Its history was k’u I. as to negative any suggestion of eei elessu'ess that could have led to t!ic epidemic. Dr. •!•!. W. Williams detailed eases under his care. AVith regard to Mrs Morrison lie said that at no time was time any sign of .septicaemia.

Mi Johns', ,ie (for the petitioners): Idotli Dr Makgill and Dr Hughes stated the,, considered this was a caso that should have lieen notified.

Witness replied that he had asked veral medical men, and all agreed Mil him that it was not a ease they “old have reported as infectious.

•In answer to further questions, .witness said that if certain conditions that arose in the patient, had not yielded to local treatment lie would lave eonsid.’ied the question of reporting the case. Replying to Dr. Elliott, witness said that if lie had a temperature of ninelyuine he would not rush off’ to notify td'e Department. l ady Luke: Out of all the patients in a given period you attended about line quarter (25). Of that number you li.ul six temperatures. That was at the time when there was influenza.?— f had it in my mind at the time that these temperatures were the sequel lo influenza. Asked by l>r. Elliott whether he attached any im porta nee to the fact that two deaths had. previously occurred witness replied, “No.” From what he could learn lie did not consider that either died of septicaemia. I)i . lalliott : Your explanation i.s that you held the view strongly that these eases were abnormal in regard to the source of infection? Witness: Yes.

Did you make any efforts to find ;ut the source by referring to other duirts, or from other or the natron ?—I had my own (■■hint.

idr. Elliott: is there any ground for [linking the other doctors would, re-u-c to help you? It is not the eus-

Dr. Elliott; It is not a mallei of •u>tom where life and death is ron■et'ned. It i.s suggested to the dist • (ill of our profession that this soailed bugbear (perhaps I should not ' ! '! a bugbear) c- such that "In n a lector in a hospital is worried about

i case which might b<> puerperal sopicnemia lie is debarred by “etiquette” :om asking his medical brethren to • l ist him. Is that so? Ido not think o. if a doctor is friendly with the ther man.

Dr. Elliott: Even if he is not Lie v is it not in accord with the traditions if tile profession for one man to help mother in difficulty?—Yes. Then there should have been no diffi■i.ltv why von could not have made liquifies among your brethren?—l iii Id have. There was no question o' Liqiiotte involved. There was no such

Mr Johnstone, niter reference had heci: made to previous rases, asked: ‘ln the light of those cases why did von pennit Mrs Delamore to go to this house ?”

Witness replied that the matron reloi ted t here had been no recent trouble Old that he attended two emergency ■ s cs on the Kith, and ,17th. which wore eitootly normal. Ho asked the maton was everything all right, and she c-,d : “Perfectly right.” It was two ;r three weeks since there had been in infeotoiiis case, and he thought it mild he all light. 111. W. N. Aholt. who attended Mrs

ones, said lie was quite sure the illicss was the continuation of illness i ioi to confinement.

Mr Johnston: If alter consultation eu diagnosed the ease as influenzal a.'ptioaoinia. with process of pneumonia :i the lungs, were you not wrong in ii titling I)r. Hughes of pneumonia udv ?

Witness: I don't think so. liifluen■ll septicaemia is merely had influenza. Mi Johnstone: The whole object of notification is to give the Department in opportunity of • looking into the natter. If you reported pneumonia lie Department would have no evidence d septicaemia.

Witness: There was no evidence at M pointing 10 puerperal septicaemia. l)r. W. X. McCormick gave evidence regarding Mrs Carter’s ease. He said he never suspected the ease as septic, lie know that two deaths hail occurred I reviously. He made no inquiries, hut

iv rs satisfied as no action was taken I,y tiie Health Officer. He did not consider ir any part ot his duty to nHike further inquiry so long as the hospital remained open. Witness attended Mrs Delamore in the absence of Dr. Williams. During her daughter's illness Mrs Rhodes was hysterical. Pa put it mildly her statements were a little wide of the mark. He could not account for the origin of septicaemia. He refrained from tolling Mrs Rhodes that her daughter was suffering from septicaemia on account of Mrs Rhodes’s excitability.