|
Want
of attention to hours of taking food.
Every careful observer of
the sick will agree in this that thousands of patients are
annually starved in the midst of plenty, from want of attention
to the ways which alone make it possible for them to take
food. This want of attention is as remarkable in those who
urge upon the sick to do what is quite impossible to them,
as in the sick themselves who will not make the effort to
do what is perfectly possible to them.
For instance, to the large
majority of very weak patients it is quite impossible to take
any solid food before 11 A.M., nor then, if their strength
is still further exhausted by fasting till that hour. For
weak patients have generally feverish nights and, in the morning,
dry mouths; and, if they could eat with those dry mouths,
it would be the worse for them. A spoonful of beef-tea, of
arrowroot and wine, of egg flip, every hour, will give them
the requisite nourishment, and prevent them from being too
much exhausted to take at a later hour the solid food, which
is necessary for their recovery. And every patient who can
swallow at all can swallow these liquid things, if he chooses.
But how often do we hear a mutton-chop, an egg, a bit of bacon,
ordered to a patient for breakfast, to whom (as a moment's
consideration would show us) it must be quite impossible to
masticate such things at that hour.
Again, a nurse is ordered
to give a patient a tea-cup full of some article of food every
three hours. The patient's stomach rejects it. If so, try
a table-spoon full every hour; if this will not do, a tea-spoon
full every quarter of an hour.
I am bound to say, that I
think more patients are lost by want of care and ingenuity
in these momentous minutiae in private nursing than in public
hospitals. And I think there is more of the _entente cordiale_
to assist one another's hands between the doctor and his head
nurse in the latter institutions, than between the doctor
and the patient's friends in the private house.
Life
often hangs upon minutes in taking food.
If we did but know the consequences
which may ensue, in very weak patients, from ten minutes'
fasting or repletion (I call it repletion when they are obliged
to let too small an interval elapse between taking food and
some other exertion, owing to the nurse's unpunctuality),
we should be more careful never to let this occur. In very
weak patients there is often a nervous difficulty of swallowing,
which is so much increased by any other call upon their strength
that, unless they have their food punctually at the minute,
which minute again must be arranged so as to fall in with
no other minute's occupation, they can take nothing till the
next respite occurs--so that an unpunctuality or delay of
ten minutes may very well turn out to be one of two or three
hours. And why is it not as easy to be punctual to a minute?
Life often literally hangs upon these minutes.
In acute cases, where life
or death is to be determined in a few hours, these matters
are very generally attended to, especially in Hospitals; and
the number of cases is large where the patient is, as it were,
brought back to life by exceeding care on the part of the
Doctor or Nurse, or both, in ordering and giving nourishment
with minute selection and punctuality.
Patients
often starved to death in chronic cases.
But in chronic cases, lasting
over months and years, where the fatal issue is often determined
at last by mere protracted starvation, I had rather not enumerate
the instances which I have known where a little ingenuity,
and a great deal of perseverance, might, in all probability,
have averted the result. The consulting the hours when the
patient can take food, the observation of the times, often
varying, when he is most faint, the altering seasons of taking
food, in order to anticipate and prevent such times--all this,
which requires observation, ingenuity, and perseverance (and
these really constitute the good Nurse), might save more lives
than we wot of.
Food
never to be left by the patient's side.
To leave the patient's untasted
food by his side, from meal to meal, in hopes that he will
eat it in the interval is simply to prevent him from taking
any food at all. I have known patients literally incapacitated
from taking one article of food after another, by this piece
of ignorance. Let the food come at the right time, and be
taken away, eaten or uneaten, at the right time; but never
let a patient have "something always standing" by
him, if you don't wish to disgust him of everything.
On the other hand, I have
known a patient's life saved (he was sinking for want of food)
by the simple question, put to him by the doctor, "But
is there no hour when you feel you could eat?" "Oh,
yes," he said, "I could always take something at
---- o'clock and ---- o'clock." The thing was tried and
succeeded. Patients very seldom, however, can tell this; it
is for you to watch and find it out.
Patient
had better not see more food than his own.
A patient should, if possible,
not see or smell either the food of others, or a greater amount
of food than he himself can consume at one time, or even hear
food talked about or see it in the raw state. I know of no
exception to the above rule. The breaking of it always induces
a greater or less incapacity of taking food.
In hospital wards it is of
course impossible to observe all this; and in single wards,
where a patient must be continuously and closely watched,
it is frequently impossible to relieve the attendant, so that
his or her own meals can be taken out of the ward. But it
is not the less true that, in such cases, even where the patient
is not himself aware of it, his possibility of taking food
is limited by seeing the attendant eating meals under his
observation. In some cases the sick are aware of it, and complain.
A case where the patient was supposed to be insensible, but
complained as soon as able to speak, is now present to my
recollection.
Remember, however, that the
extreme punctuality in well-ordered hospitals, the rule that
nothing shall be done in the ward while the patients are having
their meals, go far to counterbalance what unavoidable evil
there is in having patients together. I have often seen the
private nurse go on dusting or fidgeting about in a sick room
all the while the patient is eating, or trying to eat.
That the more alone an invalid
can be when taking food, the better, is unquestionable; and,
even if he must be fed, the nurse should not allow him to
talk, or talk to him, especially about food, while eating.
When a person is compelled,
by the pressure of occupation, to continue his business while
sick, it ought to be a rule WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTION WHATEVER,
that no one shall bring business to him or talk to him while
he is taking food, nor go on talking to him on interesting
subjects up to the last moment before his meals, nor make
an engagement with him immediately after, so that there be
any hurry of mind while taking them.
Upon the observance of these
rules, especially the first, often depends the patient's capability
of taking food at all, or, if he is amiable and forces himself
to take food, of deriving any nourishment from it.
You
cannot be too careful as to quality in sick diet.
A nurse should never put before
a patient milk that is sour, meat or soup that is turned,
an egg that is bad, or vegetables underdone. Yet often I have
seen these things brought in to the sick in a state perfectly
perceptible to every nose or eye except the nurse's. It is
here that the clever nurse appears; she will not bring in
the peccant article, but, not to disappoint the patient, she
will whip up something else in a few minutes. Remember that
sick cookery should half do the work of your poor patient's
weak digestion. But if you further impair it with your bad
articles, I know not what is to become of him or of it.
If the nurse is an intelligent
being, and not a mere carrier of diets to and from the patient,
let her exercise her intelligence in these things. How often
we have known a patient eat nothing at all in the day, because
one meal was left untasted (at that time he was incapable
of eating), at another the milk was sour, the third was spoiled
by some other accident. And it never occurred to the nurse
to extemporize some expedient,--it never occurred to her that
as he had had no solid food that day he might eat a bit of
toast (say) with his tea in the evening, or he might have
some meal an hour earlier. A patient who cannot touch his
dinner at two, will often accept it gladly, if brought to
him at seven. But somehow nurses never "think of these
things." One would imagine they did not consider themselves
bound to exercise their judgment; they leave it to the patient.
Now I am quite sure that it is better for a patient rather
to suffer these neglects than to try to teach his nurse to
nurse him, if she does not know how. It ruffles him, and if
he is ill he is in no condition to teach, especially upon
himself. The above remarks apply much more to private nursing
than to hospitals.
Nurse
must have some rule of thought about her patient's diet.
I would say to the nurse,
have a rule of thought about your patient's diet; consider,
remember how much he has had, and how much he ought to have
to-day. Generally, the only rule of the private patient's
diet is what the nurse has to give. It is true she cannot
give him what she has not got; but his stomach does not wait
for her convenience, or even her necessity.[1] If it is used
to having its stimulus at one hour to-day, and to-morrow it
does not have it, because she has failed in getting it, he
will suffer. She must be always exercising her ingenuity to
supply defects, and to remedy accidents which will happen
among the best contrivers, but from which the patient does
not suffer the less, because " they cannot be helped."
Keep
your patient's cup dry underneath.
One very minute caution,--take
care not to spill into your patient's saucer, in other words,
take care that the outside bottom rim of his cup shall be
quite dry and clean; if, every time he lifts his cup to his
lips, he has to carry the saucer with it, or else to drop
the liquid upon, and to soil his sheet, or his bed-gown, or
pillow, or if he is sitting up, his dress, you have no idea
what a difference this minute want of care on your part makes
to his comfort and even to his willingness for food.
FOOTNOTE: [1] Nurse
must have some rule of time about the patient's diet.
Why, because the nurse has
not got some food to-day which the patient takes, can the
patient wait four hours for food to-day, who could not wait
two hours yesterday? Yet this is the only logic one generally
hears. On the other hand, the other logic, viz., of the nurse
giving a patient a thing because she _has_ got it, is equally
fatal. If she happens to have fresh jelly, or fresh fruit,
she will frequently give it to the patient half an hour after
his dinner, or at his dinner, when he cannot possibly eat
that and the broth too--or worse still, leave it by his bed-side
till he is so sickened with the sight of it, that he cannot
eat it at all.
|