DEATH FROM TETANUS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3034, 8 May 1912, Page 9

DEATH FROM TETANUS.

CASE IN AUCKLAND HOSPITAL. AUCKLAND, May 1. Some rather startling statements were contained in a letter from the Auckland Tramways' Sick and Accident Fund Society which came before the Hospital and Charitable Aid Board at its meeting to-day concerning the recent death of one of the society's members in the Auckland Hospital. The letter set forth that the patient in question went into the institution on March 14 suffering from appendicitis. He was operated on tho same day as he was admitted, the operation being in every way a success. For six days the patient made excellent progress, but then lie suddenly developed tetanus (lockjaw), and after three days agonised suffering died on March 25. The letter before the board stated that an independent medical opinion had been obtained, which indicated that lockjaw did not follow upon an operation for appendicitis as a natural complication. The question, therfore, arose as to how this patient could have possibly become .infected with tetanus; An explanation had been asked by the deceased's friends of the residential medical officers at the institution, and the only suggestion they had to offer was that a scratch had been discovered on one of the deceased's toes, Avhich might have been a source of infection prior to the patient having entered the hospital. This explanation was deemed to be impossible of acceptance, and outside medical opinion was sought. The only theory advanced upon this occasion was that the catgut used in sewing up the wound might have been the source of infection, but this suggestion was also regarded as being uneatisfactory. The society further stated that it had been assured on good authority that when th« patient was in the hospital he was placed in the same ward as a tetanus patient, and so probably became infected. Under such circumstances as tnese the committee felt justified in asking for an explanation. Mr J. S. Dickson said the society's letter contained some grave statements, which would require to be very thoroughly sifted. In his opinion' it was desirable that a commission should be set up to inquire into the whole of the circumstances. Mr Mackay stated when the society's letter reached him he considered the matter to be one of such great importance that he at once had a copy sent to Dr Macguire, the senior medical officer. He believed that an inquiry would be welcomed by the medical staff. Dr Tracey Inglis (chairman of the honorary medical staff), who was present at the meeting, said he would be glad of the chance to explain one or two points in connection with the matter. The society was wrong in stating that tetanus has never been known to follow an appendi citis operation. There were many cases known to science where tetanus had been recorded, and yet no wound of any kind had been discovered. The catgut used in this operation was examined, and proved to be sterile; but tetanus bacilli were found on the appendix stump. The external wound healed, showing that there had been no infection without. The doctor admitted that there was a tetanus patient in the institution at the same time as this particular patient but said he was not in the same ward. Mr Dickson then moved that a special committee be appointed to go into the matter, that the inquiry be open to the press, and that the society be allowed to have one of its doctors in attendance ; both sides, if they were so desirous, to be re presented by a solicitor. The chairman said he would strongly advise keeping solicitors out of the case. The motion was carried.