DEATH OF A CHILD

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 136, 6 December 1926, Page 11

DEATH OF A CHILD

AFTER AN OPERATION

EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST.

> v';* 3 The death of a- child, Jean Ethel :*£*«.reaves, aged 10,' at the" Public Hoson Tuesday last was. investigate^ P£\t an inquest before'.'tho'Coroner'(Mi; , V*:S. Page, S.M.) to-day.. " *.;.y Dr. P. P. Lynch, pathologist at the w%/;-Wollington-Hospital, who had conduct- .!.•.._,;_ a post-mortem examination of the ..^.'.jeceased,' stated that, in his opinion, :'_:-':*■ leath was'jdue, to peritonitis, following tternal ulcerations. Tho child's father, AValter John „-.,»/-^ireaves, said. that his daughter, was »■;.* ridmitted to" th. Hospital' on 23rd Nov-,'v-."i}mber for ah operation for appendicitis. .^V.aer health"previously had been good. ]';£{_'*?! Dr. Eardiey L. Button,'house surgeon i.'"V.":.t the Hospital, said that' after, tlie »tVoperation,-a. saline injection was given '.:-*.jhe patient by tho nurse in her ward. i;;i;pater, the night sister reported to him ', ijlhat the child.'s body had been burnt :M:Py the saline. He ordered the neces--t-fiary treatment, and the child's condi;t;iion remained satisfactory until 29th -i .--November, when her stato.-was- such ;.-.V;|hat an operation was performed for f.iy .peritonitis. ' Tho deceased did not rally, "Ui-jlespite a blood transfusion, and died •iQßar.y the next, morning. iAfii *'10 oo;6ncr: The injections Were ">";,.!_sually nia'ij. by the nurse.on duty, and .^witness considered.the apparatus quite JOfficient. He had nover heard of a simi■i'jf t ;-'_r occurrence before. ';"ij| Mr. Page: "Could you suggest anyr .'.filing to obviate this occurrence in the 1' —"No. It it an extremely „";■. rf_re occurrence." ' ii&i Dr. T. M. Usher, who performed tho Jj,":..J.perations, said that after the first operation tho child's condition was sat_":'..lsi'a.etory. He agreed that death was due to the, burns caused by the and^uggested that in future the ■^fJemperaturo of the solution in the conshould :bo reduced. Its. effect, .would not be the same. i'iJ&alino was,,tno usual stimulant given jV ; f __ter an operation. ■fjji Gwendoline Watson, a pupil nurso. evidence of making the injection. iV*After a tii_£, she said, sho noticed that s;>_.^_e solution was not flowing, and whon ','-"Jl.j4e adjusted the flow, the saline came y.put too quickly and spread over the •-v.hild's buttocks. She had performed r-;^ld_nilar duties forty or fifty times pre-'/v-fiously without accident. .js*..| To the Coroner: She must have failed i ■•_ to notice the rush of solution immedi*>>tely, t othocsvise she would have turned o*.*** the t^p at once. Matron Stott said that Nurse Watson K'.was capable and reliable, and was '■£d_uite experienced in giving such injecv/: tions. -„,(..■•• ) f>.y Dr. D. .Wilson, Medical Superintend;.'.ent at the.-Hospital, said that there was ."..'■bo .direct, evidence to show that the ; was not due to natural ;*i.;causes. He advocated the use of a ".■_.' -hermomeie'r .in conjunction, with the _._ apparatus^ prevent burning'in a simi-V'-'-lor happening in the future. '.'-■" j A verdict was returned that the de■■v|seased met her death through being ';'; accidentally burned while receiving r/ajreatmen^'jifter an operation.