DAMAGES AWARDED.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20456, 8 November 1934, Page 4

DAMAGES AWARDED.

Sequel to Hospital Operation. WRONG FINGER REMOVED. Per Press Association. , GISBORNE, November 7. A claim for £ISOO damages for alleged negligent treatment was heard in the Supreme Court this morning, before Mr Justice Ostler. The claim was made by Brian Pelham Dods in respect to an operation performed on his left hand at the public hospital, and the defendant is Dr R. J. B. Hall, medical superintendent ol the institution. The statement of claim alleged that plaintiff was suffering from an injury to his ring finger of the left hand, and he consented to the removal of the finger. The statement alleged that the middle finger as well as the ring finger was removed, and plaintiff was therefore unable to continue his occupation as a butcher. How Operation was Performed. Dr Russell Thomas, a house surgeon at Cook Hospital, gave evidence that he performed the actual operation. Witness said that the hand was prepared for the operation by means of a table placed at right angles on the patient’s leg. One of the nurses held up the affected arm, and witness painted the whole hand with iodine. The next step was to place a sterile towel on the table, and witness then placed a similar towel between the ring and middle fingers to isolate the finger to be operated on. The patient moved, and contaminated the towels, and the whole thing had to be done again. Witness repainted the hand, and was just going to place a towel between the fingers as before, when Dr Hall asked him to put it round the wrist, as it tended to obstruct the operation in the previous position. Witness did so. The arm up to the shoulder was covered with sterile cloths, and the operation commenced. Witness took hold of the hand and indicated a spot on the hand, and asked Dr Hall if he would begin there. Dr Hall then indicated a point nearer the knuckle.. Witness evidently then had the wrong finger. His Honor: And he showed you on the wrong finger the place where the first cut ought to be made? Mistake Noticed. Witness replied “ Yes.” He confirmed the position for commencement of the operation and he proceeded to amputate the finger. Dr Hall was watching all the time and directing the operation. Dr Hall turned to leave the room when the operation was over and witness then discovered what had happened and called him back. It was witness who first noticed the mistake and drew Dr Hall’s attention to it. The technique which witness had first used in isolating the affected finger was that to which he had always been accustomed. He was certain that in the first instance he had isolated the right finger. Dr Richard J. B. I Tall, medical superintendent of Cook Hospital, gave evidence as to the operation. lie said that he gave instructions to put on fiesh sterile guards after the patient’s convulsive movement. Aftei; that was clone, continued witness, Dr Thomas grasped the hand and, indicating a point, asked whether he should start there. Witness said ‘‘No. Nearer the knuckle.” Witness did not point out the exact spot where the incision was to be made. The fingers were not all visible then. Witness did not observe that Dr Thomas was amputating the wrong finger. Witness was present most of the time, but was not watching the operation all the time. His Honor: Your presence as medical superintendent was directing the operation. Dr Hall: I was exercising general supervision. Witness stated that his duties included administration of the hospital on the medical side, and frequently he left the theatre during minor operations. On this occasion he believed he left the room, but was not quite certain. Dr Thomas was quite capable as a surgeon. Judgment was given for plaintiff, but his Honor reserved decision as to the amount.