View report page

48
In 1905, 796 persons suffering from scarlet fever
were removed to hospital from this Borough, and I have
records of thirteen instances in which, after the return
of a hospital patient, secondary cases followed within a
period of four weeks. I investigated each of these and
satisfied myself that eleven of the recently discharged
patients presented no exceptional symptom; two however
had a nasal discharge, this in one case was very
slight but in the other was free and from both nostrils
and in addition there was a purulent discharge from
one ear. I was of opinion that this particular child was
in a very infectious condition so I sent her back to
hospital where she was retained until she was quite well.
I am told by the parents in both cases that the discharge
did not appear until the child had been several
days at home. Dr. Cameron states that during the
thirteen months covered by his report, four per cent.
of the discharged hospital patients were alleged to have
infected others with scarlet fever. In about half of
these (46.5 per cent.) his investigations bore out the
allegation, so that roughly speaking, out of every one
hundred persons discharged from hospital as presumably
free from disease, two were in a more or less
infectious condition and actually communicated scarlet
fever.
Dr Cameron is of opinion that the medical officers
of the Asylums Board hospitals do all in their power
to prevent the discharge of patients in an infectious
condition and he practically excludes carelessness on
the part of these gentlemen as a cause of return cases.