View report page

15
ophthalmia neonatorum

In the course of calculations necessary for the results given above, a question arose as to
whether ophthalmia was generally more prevalent now than when notification was initiated in
1911. To answer that question certain limited data which have been collected by the
Department have been drawn upon from which it appears that the answer is in the affirmative.
The data immediately available consists of quarterly tabulations of births and cases of
ophthalmia extracted from the Registrar-General's Quarterly Returns. In the appended
tabulation two series of rates are given for St. Marylebone based (a) on the total births as
obtained from the Registrar-General's Returns and (b) on totals limited as far as possible, to
births actually belonging to the Borough. The additional calculations were made because it
was thought that the ophthalmia rates would be understated by the inclusion of births occurring
in Queen Charlotte's Lying-in Hospital.

(a)—Including births in Queen Charlotte's Hospital, (b)—Corrected for non-resident births.
Comparing the first quinquennium with the second, Paddington and Hampstead are the
only two Boroughs showing any reductions in the rates amounting to 2.7 per cent. in the
former instance and 3.6 in the latter. In Westminster and St. Marylebone (b) the rates for
1916-20 are more than double those for 1911-15. The rates for 1911-13, 1914-18 and 1919-20
show progressive increases except in Paddington and Hampstead, where the rates for 1919-20
are below those for 1914-18, both boroughs, however, showing higher rates in the last period
than the first.
The subject is one demanding more extended study, which is beyond the scope of this
Report. Whether the increased prevalence be due to the spread of venereal disease or to
increasing neglect of precautions at birth, it is impossible at present to say. Prima facie the
latter cause would appear to be improbable owing to the stringent rules of the Central
Midwives' Board and to the close supervision of midwives exercised by the Officers of the
County.
Interval to Onset.—In three instances no information was obtained of the date of onset of
the inflammation, and in one instance the certificate related to a recurrence of ophthalmia in a
•case already reported. The exclusion of those cases left for analysis 28 cases reported in
1919 and 27 in 1920. The results of the analysis are appended.

The distribution for 1920 is very different from that for 1919. In the latter year 572 per
cent. of the attacks developed during the first week after birth, as compared with 74'0 per cent.
in 1920. It may be added, for what it is worth, that in 1919 3 children were stated to have
been born with the eyes in a state of inflammation, the number of such cases in 1920 increasing
to 8.