View report page

18
did more than one case of puerperal fever occur in the practice of the same midwife or doctor
during the year. Two cases were removed to the Infirmary, one case was removed to a general
hospital, and one to a special hospital for women.
By an Order dated February 18th, 1911, the Metropolitan Asylums Board were authorised
to admit to their hospitals, with the consent of the Local Government Board, certain classes of
poor persons who were formerly not eligible for admission. Under this Order the consent of the
Board was subsequently given to the admission of poor persons suffering from measles, whooping
cough, or puerperal fever. By an Order dated August 20th, 1912, the Local Government Board
further authorised the Managers of the Metropolitan Asylums Board to admit into any of their
hospitals a person suffering from puerperal fever who is not a pauper, and who has been
recommended for admission by the Medical Officer of Health for the Metropolitan district in which
the said person is residing.
After the publication of this Older only two cases of puerperal fever were notified before the
end of the year 1912. Both patients were in good circumstances and unsuitable for admission
to a public hospital.
When a midwife has been in contact with infection, her washable clothing is boiled and other
clothing is disinfected by the staff of the Public Health Department. As soon as she has disinfected
herself, her clothing and her appliances to the satisfaction of the Supervising Authority, she is
allowed to resume her work. The premises where puerperal fever has occurred are inspected, but
they are not in ordinary circumstances disinfected.

Thus out of 18 infants who survived, 15 recovered with unimpaired vision. Of the three
remaining infants one presented opacities in both cornæ which were not central, but
which encroached on the lower margin of the pupil. One was blind in one eye and
one presented an opacity in one eye which occluded vision except through the upper half of the
pupillary aperture. In addition to the 22 notified cases of ophthalmia, 11 infants were reported by
the London County Council Inspector of Midwives as suffering from inflammation of the eyes,
which did not result in any impairment of vision. The Health Visitors visit every case of
inflammation or ophthalmia in their respective districts as soon as the notification is received, and
assist the mother of the infant to obtain the necessary treatment.
Where the eyes require constant attention the local branch of the Queen Victoria Jubilee
Institute has very kindly arranged for their nurses to attend at the request of the Health Visitors
on children who are under medical treatment in their homes. Similar arrangements have also been
made with the Ranyard Nurses, who are prepared to pay four visits daily to cases of ophthalmia
in their district on the Hammersmith border of North Kensington. In certain cases it has also
been found possible for patients to attend daily at the Western Ophthalmic Hospital in Marylebone,
which is within easy access by train from Notting Hill Station. The London Hospital is
unfortunately the only public institution in London, with the exception of the Infirmaries, where
the mother and child can both be received as in-patients. Where immediate removal to hospital
of mother and child is imperative, the Metropolitan Asylums Board ambulances "are available without
charge for the purpose.
Anterior Poliomyelitis—Only one case of this disease was notified in 1912. The patient
was a girl aged 2 years. Her family were in fairly good circumstances, occupying 5 rooms and
the father was employed as a printer's machine minder. There was no evidence of vermin in the
house and no animals were kept at the time of the inquiry, but three rabbits had recently died
on the premises. The child had been in contact with a patient suffering from measles on the day
before the first symptoms of acute anterior poliomyelitis appeared.