NAPIER HOSPITAL

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXI, 21 June 1937, Page 2

NAPIER HOSPITAL

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY

FURTHER MEDICAL EVIDENCE

t United Press Association!

NAPIER, 19th June.

At the inquiry into the management of the Napier Hospital the sister who previously gave evidence in regard to the Shrimpton Ward, recalled, stated that she had met Dr. H. Berry at the request of Dr. Allan Berry to discuss the special hot bath treatement being given to children who had contracted the disease.

Mr Foden: I think Dr. Harold Berry saw you in respect to the hot baths treatment? —Yes, on two or three occasions. Dr. Allan Berry asked me to consult Dr. Harold Berry on the treatment.

Was Dr. H. Berry conversant with the temperatures in the black book? — No, he did not see them. Would it be unfair to suggest that two hot baths were given with your knowledge and the knowledge of both the doctors? —That is so. Mr Grant: This is the first occasion on which you have given evidence regarding Dr. .H. Berry?—Yes. You never thought fit to mention this at the hospital inquiry?—l was not asked about it. Did you tell the matron or the doctors? —No. MEETING WITH DR. BERRY / What was the purpose of the discussion with Dr. H. Berry?—Simply more information about the treatment. So that it was on Dr. H. Berry’s advice that you raised the temperatures to 100 and 112 degrees?—Through Dr. Allan Berry. You knew Dr. H. Berry could not come to the ward so you made an appointment to meet him somewhere else? —I met him by accident when he was visiting his wife. Mr Foden: If I produce a third person to say that you discussed in your office with Dr. H. Berry the treatment of the children what would you say? —My answer would be that I did not discuss it with him in my office or in the ward. Mr Foden: My information is that a third person was present.—l have no recollection of it at all. Mr Lawry: Are you quite certain that Dr. H. Berry did not see any of the children under treatment?—Yes. If you had wanted to see Dr. H. Berry you would have had to see him in the off-duty hours or at his surgery?—Yes. Did you carry out the treatment he mentioned?—The treatment was a confirmation of Dr. Allan Berry’s treatment. Mr Mosley: You were anxious to meet him to ' comply with Dr. Allan Berry’s request?—Yes. Mr Foden: Did you not discuss the treatment in the presence of Dr. H. Berry’s wife?—Yes. PRESCRIBING OF THE BATH Dr. James Allan Berry, honorary surgeon of the Napier Hospital and a member of the Hawkes Bay Hospital Board, in his opening evidence, detailed the treatment given to the child that died. He referred to the fact that the child had been suffering from hip disease. Hip treatment would take, the best part of a year. The child was in plaster for two periods of six weeks. Mr Foden: During that period she contracted the disease?—Yes. What treatment did you decide to apply?—The sister asked me if there were any other treatments, and I mentioned two, one of which was a hot bath. I was not sure of the exact temperature for a day or two until I looked it up, and then I prescribed them. The first I prescribed was a hip bath on written instructions to the sister on a piece of paper. Why was it that you abandoned ttys convenient treatment and resorted to the other treatment?—The authority which said that the treatment would clear up the trouble in eight days was such that it was worth trying. Was it a novel treatment?—No. Was it unusual?—Yes. Would you object to it being called an ufiusual treatment?—No. EXPERIMENTAL IN NATURE This was the first occasion you tried this treatment? —Yes. So it was an experiment?—All treatments are experiements. Everyday treatments?- Yes. So that a man who puts himself in the hands of a medical man at any time is subject to experiments?—Well, that is hardly the way to put it. Mr Mosley: That’s the only inference the layman can take from it. Dr. Berry: Well, one thing will react on one person and not on another. Mr. Foden: Did that authority say the treatment was suitable for a child two years of age?—No; five years of age. Did the authority suggest that there was any risk on a child two years of age?—No. So if another authority said that there would be a risk you would not agree?—No. Mr Foden then asked the witness to read an authority which he 5 said showed that there were risks in hot thermal baths for children. This was read out by the witness, who pointed out that in his opinion this authority referred to complete baths and not hip baths. Your faith was pinned on this?—No 1 didn’t believe it would be a cure, j but it was worth trying. Mr Mosley: As an experiment?—Yes.! Mr Foden: You knew that some of Dr. Whyte’s patients were receiving this treatment?—Yes. Later you saw them having a bath? —Yes.

DID NOT INTERFERE

At this stage Mr Foden produced the black book, which witness said he had not seen until the last few days. When you ascertained that the other children were having the baths dm you have any discussion with the honoraries about them?—No.

Why not?—lt was not my place to mterfere with them. They were using your treatment, and you said nothing about it?—Yes.

Do you think that was professional etiquette?— Yes. They were having what can only be described as a special treatment, and unless the others were told they would be in the dark?—Yes.

Does it not strike you that there is an air of secrecy about it?—No, Was it on your instructions that other doctors patients were given your treatment?—No. Certainly not.

Did you ever mention it to the medical superintendent?—No. Did you see that permanent records were kept?—Yes. They are in the black book. And wouldn’t you ask to see them?— No. I was informed what they were. Did you make any records? —No. Did you make it your business to see if anyone else did?—No. So far as you are concerned no record was kept?—No. In your capacity as a member of the board you consider that embarking on the exepriment'as you did was in the interests of the institution? —Certainly. In answer to Mr Foden the witness said that he considered the risks of the treatment negligible, but there was a risk. One was always taking risks. He did so without consulting the parents. He stopped the treatment when the patient died, and had nothing to do with the treatment of the other children. When the child died its temperature was 108.6. Dr Foley had blamed the sister, but witness said Dr. Foley and himself were to blame if anyone was. He advised the nurse to record all the facts in case she was blamed. !He did not think the child died of hyperpyrexia. He should have told Dr. Foley the temperature. He thought it was encumbent on him to tell Mr Bedford (J.P. and Coroner) full details of the treatment and death but not the medical superintendent, because the latter knew of the treatment. Mr Bedford told witness that Dr. Foley had seen the Magistrate, and it was decided not to hold an inquest. Dr. Foley was responsible for what appeared in the death certificate. The cause of death as given was insufficient. He did not think he was called upon to mention hyperpyrexia to the Coroner, but he did now. He started the post-mortem examination, but did not know with whose consent or authority. He thought permission had been obtained. If permission was not obtained the action would be wrong. The chairman: I am glad to hear that.

To Mr Foden Dr. Berry said he did not knolv where the notes were on the post-mortem, which revealed nothing. It would have been better from the public point of view had he not made the examination. Hyperpyrexia had nothing to do with the cause of death. He could not understand why the child died. He raised the temperature of the bath to 120 degrees at one end. The child started to whimper and was lifted out. The cause of death was heart failure and hyperpyrexia was a contributing cause. To Mr Harker Dr. Berry said it would have been better to get consent for the treatment. Looking back he realised the collapse was a matter of extreme importance. There was no secrecy about the post-mortem. He opposed the sister’s dismissal, although she had committed a grave derelection of duty.

Replying to Mr Grant he said he did so because she had done her best in the matter. Dr. Foley and witness’s brother were present at the postmortem. He thought Dr. Foley had forgotten when he said the examination was one-third finished when he arrived. Dr. Foley gave the only certicate he could.