Snt,—In your issue of January 12th Mr. Robert Hyde expresses
the view that more adequate provision should be made for the primary treatment of fractures due to air raids, and for the necessary subsequent rehabilitation. His criticism of the state of affairs in relation to the treatment of fractures is wholly justified. It is obvious to many of us who have been placed in charge of first-aid posts that the basic principles in the treatment of fractures have been almost completely ignored by the responsible authority.
The same criticism holds good for the rest of the casualty services. There is likely to be a considerable increase in suffering and loss of life if the present system is continued. First-aid posts not situated at a hospital where further treat- ment of the patient can be carried out with a minimum disturbance are not only useless, but constitute a very grave danger.
The ideal system is a very simple one. There must be well-trained stretcher parties to which are attached doctors used to dealing with accidents in bad light and under difficult conditions. These doctors would need only a minimum equipment. The reception departments at hospitals would in most cases need to be enlarged to take the increased number of casualties, since all casualties which require moving by stretcher would be sent thereto. The hospitals themselves would require additional staff ; these could be recruited from the practitioners in the neighbourhood. The additional staff so recruited would be trained in some special branch of war surgery or resuscitation.
These are merely the broad principles of the scheme, the details of which are available.—Yours faithfully, Hendra, Wash Lane, Yardley. ARTHUR BEAUCHAMP.
Previous page
