NURSE’S DEATH.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20556, 6 March 1935, Page 5

NURSE’S DEATH.

Poisoned by Prick From Rose Thorn. DANGER ALWAYS PRESENT. (Special to the “ Star.”) SYDNEY, February 28. On February 3, Nurse Brett, 36 years of age, one of the proprietors of a private hospital at Earl wood, was busy in her garden and noticed that she had pricked a finger with a. rose thorn. Eight days later she died in Marrickville Hospital from blood-poisoning, and the medical witnesses could suggest nothing but the scratch from the thorn as the causer of the tragedy. This is the second time within IS months that death from septicaemia, due to a scratch from a rose thorn, has been recorded in Sydney, and in this instance the progress of the malady had been so carefully watched that there could be nothing doubtful or speculative about the verdict. Nurse Nash, Miss Brett's partner, said that on the day after she had noticed the scratch, Nurse Brett complained of feeling sick and said that her neck was stiff. Nurse Nash thought that she had caught a chill—she had been up till 3 a.m. on professional duty—and on her advice, as her temperature was then 100 degrees, she took arj aspirin and went to bed. Next day her temperature was 102 degrees and her back was painful, so Dr. Grieve, who was called in, thinking that the fever might be due to influenza, sent her to Marrickville Hospital. He seems to have suspected blood poisoning, but he advised Nurse Nash to say nothing of this for fear of alarming the patient. Death After Eight Days. Nurse Brett's brother visited her on February 8, and she was then so ill that she found it difficult to converse, but she showed him her wounded finger and said something about the danger of scratches and the need for care in gardening. On the following day the progress of the malady was so strongly

pronounced that Dr. Grieve diagnoseu septicaemia, but by this time matters had gone so far that the patient was really beyond medical aid, and on February 12 —nine days after the finger was scratched —she was dead. It may be noted that Mr. Brett told the coroner that he was quite satisfied with the treatment that his sister had received; nor did the coroner, in any way, reflect upon the doctors in attendance. But the case hae naturally attracted a certain amount of public attention, and several leading medical men have been interviewed about it. I>r. Morris, who is Director-General of Public Health, said that while it is unusual for anyone to die from the effect of a rose thorn puncture, “the fact remains that the slightest superficial injury might result in death if a virulent microbe enteied the body through the broken skin.” In this way, ns other doctors have pointed out, a scratch from a pin or needle or a splinter Victim Probably “Run Down.” This appears to disprove of the natural suggestion that the rose-thorns are, in themselves, “poisonous.” Of course there may be some poisonous gerip. actually present on the thorn when it tears the ITeeli. But all that we need assume is that the laceration opens a way for the entry of the poison into the system, and then, to quote Dr. Morris again, “the susceptibility of the patient to blood poisoning depends on the resistance of his body to the infection.” If the system ie fatigued or “run down” when the germ attacks it—as was probably the case with Nurse Brett—the victim may soon succumb. But when one of our doctors said the other day that “every rose thorn is a potential carrier of death,” all he meant was that the thorn-scratch may open a path for the omni-present poison germ, and then blood-poisoning—streptococcal septicaemia is its correct name—may develop with fatal effect.