PATIENT'S CLAIM

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22976, 2 March 1938, Page 17

PATIENT'S CLAIM

hospital board sued COMPLAINTS TREATMENT ACTION FOR £Bl5 DAMAGES EVIDENCE' FOR THE DEFENCE An action for damages amounting *Bl5, brought jointly against the Thames Hospital Board successors to the .liabilities of the defunct Ha,,, hospital district, a,«l Dr. Arelnbald Tenkins. medical superintendent of the Waihi Hospital, was .continued in the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr. Justice Callan and a jury The plaintiff was Alice Darlington, widow, of Waihi, who was admitted to the Waihi Hospital after an accident on March 29, 1937, and was under l)r. Jenkins' care there until August 11. The claim was based on the allegation that the doctor's treatment of her in hospital while she suffered a fractured wrist and thigh and his general care and supervision of her were negligent, careless and faulty '.lhe defence denied that plaintiff had suffered anv negligent treatment and contended that the action was statute barred, because it had not been started within S ix months of the acts or omissions, complained oft Plaintiff was represented by Mr. j Barrowclough and Mr. Clark, of W'uhi, . and Mr. V. R- Meredith and Mr. >«. 1. Smith appeared for the defendants. Major Injury In opening his case Mr. Meredith • ga i(l that according to literature on the subject a fracture of the femoral shaft Tvas a major injuirv and medical evidence would he brought to show that | in treating this class of injury the practitioner would be extremely fortunate if he could get through without 'complications. Successful treatment m *he case of an old person who was reduced in flesh would be nothing less than a miracle. Dr. McCaw/had admitted that the man on the spot must exercise his judgment in any particular case. In conaction with the wrist Dr. Jenkins would sav that after reducing the fracture he took an X-ray which showed that the reduction was not perfect, but tinder the circumstances he was satisfied Three medical men would say they would be satisfied with the same result. The fact that plaintiff could not close her hand and fingers would be shown to be a natural consequence of a fractured wrist and of her age. It would be further pointed out that with an elderly woman bed and prosHire sores were liable no matter what , was done. Because Dr. Jenkins had never made less than two visits to plaintiff daily it would bo difficult to suggest that he was careless or -negligent.

Defendant's Evidence Di : . Jenkins said lie qualified at Sydney University in 1923. He was appointed medical superintendent of Waihi Hospital in 1935, after he had filled a number of positions in Australian hospitals. He held the dipbrans of Bachelor of Medicine and Master of Surgery. . . "When plaintiff had entered hospital on March 29 her physical condition was very poor. An X-rj.y photograph of the wrist showed a complete reduction in one position, but not a complete reduction in the other, although it was quite satisfactory. He had tried his best to get complete reduction. After describing the treatment g ren to the injured thigh and the placing of plaintiff's legs in splints, witness said that for the first two or three weeks he visited her three or four times a day, when he would attend to her limb'), including their position. Ho saw her leg at every visit and there was no inflammation or anything to indicate trouble. There was a liability in elderly people to bed and pressure sores, more so in the case of an aged and debilitated person. When witness found that tho fracture of plaintiff's wrist had slipped, be advised her to go to Auckland Hospital for treatment as he had no assistant to help in performing the operation which was necessairy. Plaintiff had refused to have any operative treatment. Treatment Outlined Witness outlined the treatment given when he discovered a sore under the pkster on plaintiff's leg. This, he said, dried up in the last three days of her fctay in hospital. There was no other sore open at the time. The first ho lward of any complaint from plaintiff wis at a Hospital Board meeting in October, Cross-examined by Mr. Barrowclough on the question of the fractured wrist, witness said that when he saw the second X-ray photograph he did not think any further attempt at reduction was necessary. Plaintiff had never complained of the wrist or any pain in it. From what plaintiff said in evidence, witness suggested that she had deliberately interfered with the splint on her ynst. Such interference would explain to him what was doubtful iti his mincl as to the cause of the wrist slipping. There tiere two sores on plaintiff's left leg but neither was above the Knee, he said. What Mrs. Hovle had described about a sore above tiie knee tru ust could not possibly be Re-examined, witness said that the wiVu n^1 nn . er treating a leg affected 'th phlebitis was with hot water omentation. The extreme heat Mrs. sa 'd she had used would affect e blood vessels and would be liable to cause gangrene. urther evidence for the defence will ™ called to-day.