Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NAPIER HOSPITAL

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY MEDICAL MEN’S EVIDENCE <Pf.b United Press Association) NAPIER, June 21. Dr Harold Berry, a brother of Dr Allan Berry, was the first witness when the Royal Commission inquiring into the affairs of the Napier Hospital resumed its sitting this morning.

He approved of the treatment given, but did not visit the hospital many times to discuss the matter with the nurse. He discussed it only once, when the patient was in the hospital. Continuing, witness said the sister was wrong if she said he discussed the matter several times. Witness and his brother entered the postmortem room together. He had spoken to Dr Foley before the postmortem commenced. If the coroner ordered a post-mortem, no other doctor should be present. There was an element of risk in the treatment, but not so much as in operation.

Dr Whyte detailed the instructions for one of his patients. He never approved of the heat treatment. There was no justification for saying that his patients were neglected. N. J. Ellison, bacteriologist at the hospital (recalled) said that at a post-mortem, in the latter stages he formed the opinion that the two Berrys were trying to put something over Dr Foley. Witness felt embarrassed and sought permission to retire, but Dr Allan Berry said: “I would sooner you stayed.” Dr Foley (recalled) "said he and Dr Allan Berry conducted the postmortem, the latter saying he would see the coroner. He had asked the sister if the child had been examined prior to bath treatment. The sister said “No.” Witness said: “That makes is awkward for you all.” He thought death was due to heart failure, but Dr A. Berry might have expected vulva vaginitis to be recorded. He thought the remark about “You’ll be in this, Jim.” was jocular. Witness thought Ellison was unduly worrying when he thought the Berrys were putting something over. A. E. Bedford (recalled) said that when he stated 'that he did not hold an inquest on hospital cases, he referred to other than accident and suicide victims.

Dr J. F. Browne (Auckland Hospital) gave expert evidence on the treatment of vulva vaginitis. He said he was always on the lookout for new methods which might prove successful. He hoped that in fever theraphy a definite cure would be found, but he was not prepared to make a definite statement. Dr Whyte’s treatment could have been carried out by the nurse in charge. Dr P. P. Lynch, pathologist, of Wellington, detailed the possible causes of infection, one of thernost favoured being unsuspected infection in hospital. Constant vigilance was the only prevention, mere routine not being sufficient. If the disease spread from an unsuspected source the absence of nursing technique would probably be the cause. It would be difficult for a nurse in a busy ward to wash her hands after taking every temperature. His examination of the victim’s organs did not reveal the cause of death. Having heard the evidence he was of the opinion that he was able to give the cause of death. A temperature of 110 would be a great danger to a child. In his opinion hyperpyrexia was the immediate cause of death, and vulva vaginitis was a contributory factor Children did not die from that disease. It was desirable that another doctor should have been present at the post-mortem. The first collanse of the child was a danger signal. ADMINISTRATION OF DRUG A FURTHER INVESTIGATION (Per United Press Association* NAPIER, Juno 21. The commission sat to-night to investigate the administration to S. J. Monlgometry of a drug known as neohydroil. It was stated that Montgomery had already received £IOOO damages for ill-effects suffered. Evidence describing the administration of the drug prior to an X-ray examination and of the ill-effects later suffered was given by Samuel James Montgomery. Medical experts and a member of the nursing staff also gave evidence disclosing that there had been a misunderstanding, and that neohydroil. which was then a fairly now drug and not widely known, had been used instead of abrodil.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19370622.2.101

Bibliographic details

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23223, 22 June 1937, Page 10

Word Count
676

NAPIER HOSPITAL Otago Daily Times, Issue 23223, 22 June 1937, Page 10

NAPIER HOSPITAL Otago Daily Times, Issue 23223, 22 June 1937, Page 10