View report page

44
cases," it may be explained, is applied to those
cases of infectious disease, of the same nature,
which occur after the return home of a patient
from Hospital, and are nearly always considered by
the laity to be due to laxity on the part of the
Hospital Staff in discharging patients.
Dr. Birdwood writes that on 61 occasions it was
reported that infectious illness followed the return
home of patients from the Board's Hospitals. The
intervals between the return of the patients and the
new cases were as follows:—
The same day, 2 cases. Within 1 week, 24 cases.
Within 1 month, 29 cases. After 5 weeks, 3 cases.
After 6 weeks, 3 cases.
He goes on to say: " That the second outbreak is not
always due to the original patient being in an infectious condition
on discharge, is demonstrated by the following considerations
:—
1st. The interval between the discharge of the original
patient and the initial illness of the others, is either too
short or too long in three out of every five of them.
2nd. Several of the original patients, and some of the
others, were not suffering from Scarlet Fever.
3rd. Some of the houses seem to keep up a regular
supply of patients. Their relatives have also told me
that their sanitary environment at home was faulty.
4th. Light is shed on how the disease is spread, by
even the little we are able to find out at the Hospital.
For instance, a boy went from here to join his brothers
and sisters at the sea-side; he was intimately associated
with them there, and they were all quite well till a week
after their return home. Scarlet Fever then broke out in
that family.