RETURN OF ENTEROBACTER

The issue with respect to the three reported cases of enterobacter at the San Fernando General Hospital is not merely one of steps being taken in light of the cases to prevent and control the spread of the disease, but rather why had it been possible to have had the outbreak at the institution in the first place? If the necessary precautions have been taken following on the problem having been identified were there not always mechanisms in place to prevent, possibly, a resurgence of enterobacter? Will these precautions be on a continuing basis, or is it possible that the South West Regional Health Authority, under whose responsibility the hospital falls, may allow them to lapse sometime after the disease abates? If this is so then is the country likely to see more enterobacter cases at the hospital?

The entero virus, according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, infects “the intestines and sometimes other organs.” Because babies are particularly vulnerable to diseases if sufficient precautionary measures are not instituted is there the possibility that there had been a lapse at the San Fernando General Hospital? Meanwhile, whatever the breakdown in statistics with respect to enterobacter the grim and unpleasant reality is that the disease can kill. Admittedly, this may be rare at hospitals in Trinidad and Tobago, nonetheless because it can be fatal every reasonable step should be taken to ensure that the possibility of enterobacter recurring is kept to a realisable minimum. Is the responsibility not a shared one, and if so to which specific employee groups at the hospital have the relevant tasks been apportioned? Has the South West Regional Authority sought to investigate whether indeed there was a breakdown and, if so, then where did this breakdown lie?

We accept that the enterobacter problem can arise, can surface in any hospital in the world, whether the health institution is in a developed nation as, for example, the United States of America or the United Kingdom, or in a developing country such as Trinidad and Tobago. But systems can be put in place where there is the possibility of controlling it. But even as we state this we recognise that having a completely sterile unit is virtually impossible. In addition, there is always the question of human error. And, unfortunately, there have been all too many examples of human error, or should we say downright indifference at several of our public hospitals, even at the level of the respective health authority.

Only recently, the head of the Neonatal Department of the Port-of-Spain General Hospital, Dr Petronella Manning-Alleyne felt constrained to point out the lack of equipment at the hospital needed for the affording of proper health care for recently born babies. She had spoken of equipment in need of repair for several months, including ventilators in use at the hospital since the 1980s and which had been deemed as obsolete. Was it possible that a not dissimilar lack of required equipment at the San Fernando General Hospital along with human error, had been a contributory factor with respect to the three cases of enterobacter there?