View report page

38
February.—No cases of typhus fever were notified or removed to hospital during this month.
March.—On March 12th I was informed by the medical officer of health of Islington, that three
cases of typhus had occurred in his district. All the patients were members of one
family, and in the case of one of them, a female, aged 23, the disease proved fatal.
The other patients affected were males, aged 27 and 23 respectively. Mr. Harris
makes the following reference to these cases in his quarterly report for the first quarter
of 1895, under the heading typhus fever—
"One death occurred from this disease. Originally the patient was notified as
suffering from enteric fever, and the death certificate so described it. It happened,
however, that two other patients living in the same house, were also notified as suffering
from the latter disease, and were removed to the Metropolitan Asylums Board
Hospital, where the resident physician became doubtful as to the diagnosis being
correct, and therefore at once made application to me to obtain permission for a post
mortem examination of the body of the deceased, who fortunately had not been
buried. Leave to make the examination having been freely accorded, it was
ascertained that the disease was not enteric but typhus fever. The examination was
made by Dr. Goodall of the Eastern Hospital. Homerton. This death was the only
one registered in London during the quarter. It is a matter for regret that the
origin of the disease could not be ascertained." Mr. Harris has informed me that it
was supposed that one of the patients, referred to above, contracted the disease from a
man with whom he had been working in Highgate, but that further inquiries made in
the last-named district had not yielded any result.
April.—On April 22nd a woman, aged 47, and on April 24th a man, aged 47, living at the
same address in Deptford, were certified to be suffering from typhus fever. The
patients were removed to the South Eastern Hospital, where the diagnosis of typhus
was not confirmed.
May.—On May 10th a woman, aged 25, whose home was in Whitechapel, was certified to be
suffering from typhus. The patient had been resident for some months in the house
where she was taken ill. She was removed to the Eastern Hospital, Homerton, and
was subsequently discharged cured. Dr. Loane, the medical officer of health of
Whitechapel, informs me that no source of infection could be traced. The house, in
one room of which the patient lived with her sister and an infant, was a back to back
house without through ventilation.
June.—On June 7th a boy, aged 5, living in Clerkenwell, was certified to be suffering from
typhus. The boy was not removed to hospital, and no further particulars have been
obtainable with regard to his illness.
On June 23rd a girl, aged 8, living in Poplar, was certified to be suffering from
typhus. The child was removed to the Eastern Hospital, where her illness terminated
fatally, and the cause of death was found to be acute meningitis.
July.—On July 17th the illness of a man, aged 33, living in Lambeth, was certified as typhus.
The case was removed to the South Eastern Hospital, and was there diagnosed as acute
dermatitis. The patient was discharged from hospital on July 29th.
August.—On August 26th a girl, aged 17, living in Hackney, was certified to be suffering from
typhus. No other cases of typhus developed in connection with this case, and no
source of infection could be traced.
September and October.—Two children, living in the same house in Islington, were certified
to be suffering from typhus, one on 30th September, and one on the 4th October.
Mr. Harris writes with regard to these cases—"Their origin was most obscure, and
could not be traced. The surroundings of the patients were clean and altogether unlike
those I have most frequently found associated with typhus fever." Mr. Harris has
informed me that one of the children had been on a visit to a place in Kent where she
had been employed in "hopping."
October.—On October 16th a man, aged 24, living in Battersea, was certified to be suffering
from typhus. There appears to have been considerable doubt as to the nature of the
illness. No other cases occurred in connection with this case, and no source of
infection could be traced.
November.—On November 20th a man who had recently arrived in the docks was reported
to be suffering from typhus. Inquiry elicited the fact that it had been intended
to notify the case as one of typhus abdominalis, i.e., of typhoid fever.
It will be seen that in the majority of these cases the illness was notified as typhus in error.
In three instances a diagnosis of typhus was made concerning patients who were admitted to the
hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylmus Board. Two of these patients came from Islington, and as
has been already mentioned, a third and a fatal case occurred in a woman who lived in the house
from which these two persons were removed. The third case referred to in the Asylums Board
returns was that of a woman who came from Whitechapel.
Enteric Fever.
The number of cases of enteric fever notified in the Administrative County of London in 1895,
was 3,521, and the number of deaths belonging to the administrative county was 598, compared with
3,375 cases and 610 deaths in 1894.