The science of successful surgery / by John B. Roberts.

  • Roberts, John B. (John Bingham), 1852-1924.
Date:
1889
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The science of successful surgery / by John B. Roberts. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    21/26 (page 19)
    quirements and professional choice, I can allow no such latitude in the rejection of such generally accepted truths as those of which I now speak. Amputation of a finger-tip may possibly be permissible with a dirty scalpel and dirty hands, though I question it; but certainly no one should be allowed to amputate an arm or a leg under such conditions of risk. He who, from prejudice or inexcusable ignorance, performs such an objec- tionable operation may, or may not, be legally responsible if fatal pyemia occurs, but I am in- clined to think that he is. At any rate it would be wise in him not to call upon me as a witness in his defense. These opinions may increase the already heavy responsibility of the surgeon’s life; but, on the other hand, the greater certainty of success should insure him larger fees and greater satisfaction. My own practice is to first endeavor to obtain absolute cleanliness of patient, operator, assist- ants, instruments and dressings; and then, on account of the difficulty of attaining perfection in this regard, to employ, as a rule, chemical an- tiseptics as an additional safeguard. There is no question in my mind that cleanliness is the more important element in my success at preventing su]^urative accidents. Still, accidental failure in absolute cleanliness or incidental carelessness on the part of myself or assistants is liable to be fol- lowed by such disaster that I usually, though not always, prefer the association of cleanliness and antiseptic solutions. Moreover, septic or specific inoculation of the surgeon’s own hands is unlikely to occur when they are bathed in germicidal agents. The genius of successful surgery has led to un- exampled and unexpected progress; for aggressive surgery is the outcome of the succe.ss that has fol- lowed the adoption of aseptic carefulness. Before the aseptic era aggression was often sheer reck