Ophthalmia neonatorum : its etiology and prevention / by Sydney Stephenson.
- Stephenson, Sydney, 1862-1923
- Date:
- 1903
Licence: In copyright
Credit: Ophthalmia neonatorum : its etiology and prevention / by Sydney Stephenson. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by UCL Library Services. The original may be consulted at UCL (University College London)
5/20 page 5
![in Newly-born Children/ 1898), it will be found that of my 121 cases of ophthalmia neonatorum, gonococci were ; demonstrated in 71—that is, in 58-67 per cent. The total number of cases at our disposal, then, is 1498, and gonococci were present in 60-17 per cent. As the numbers dealt with are tolerably large, we shall ■ scarcely err if we assume that about two-thirds of all cases of ophthalmia in newly-born babies are due to the micrococcus of gonorrhoea. The practical importance of this generalisation lies in the fact that in ophthalmia the cornea seldom suffers unless gonococci be the cause of the conjunctival inflammation. The other micro-organisms that have been found in ophthalmia neonatorum are the following, named in the order of their relative frequency:—(1) the pneumococcus ; (2) the Koch-Weeks bacillus;* (3) the diplobacillus of Morax-Axenfeld; (4) the Bacterium coli j (5) the Klebs- Loeffler bacillus; (6) the pneumobacillus; (7) common pyococci; (8) streptococci; and (9) Micrococcus luteus. It will be apparent, therefore, that a first necessity in the more exact diagnosis of ophthalmia neonatorum is the ■ bacteriological examination of the secretion from the con- junctiva. In my opinion, no figures of so-called purulent ophthalmia should now be accepted unless this obvious precaution has been taken. It is true that, after some Practical experience, there is not much difficulty about identifying most cases of true gonorrhoea! ophthalmia, but the diagnosis can never be said to rest upon a certain and scientific basis unless gonococci are actually demonstrated. There are, indeed, cases when the signs are so slight that nobody from a casual examination would suspect that gonococci lay at the root of the mischief, and no amount ■ of mere clinical experience will enable one to identify such * Under this head is included the micro-organism described by Dr gur Nedden ('Klin. Monatsbl. f. Augen./ 1900, p. 173) as the pseudo- influenza bacillus, and found by him in a case of ophthalmia neonatorum ,i° ]r f Addon's description, this is identical with the Koch- * Weeks bacillus.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21647094_0007.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
