The Final Diagnosis Arthur Hailey 13 page

The old man shook his head. “No good. It would take too long.”

Trying to be discreet, Coleman persisted, “But surely if we checked the cross file . . .” He paused.

“We haven’t got one.” It was said softly, and at first Coleman wondered if he had heard aright. Then, almost as if to anticipate the other’s incredulity, Pearson went on, “It’s something I’ve been meaning to set up for a long time. Just never got around to it.”

Hardly believing what he had heard, “You mean . . . we can’t study any previous cases?”

“It would take a week to find them.” This time there was no mistaking Pearson’s embarrassment. “There aren’t too many just like this. And we haven’t that much time.”

Nothing that Pearson might have said could have shocked David Coleman quite so much as this. To him, and to all pathologists whom he had trained and worked with until now, the cross file was an essential professional tool. It was a source of reference, a means of teaching, a supplement to a pathologist’s own knowledge and experience, a detective which could assimilate clues and offer solutions, a means of reassurance, and a staff to lean on in moments of doubt.

It was all of this and more. It was an indication that a pathology department was doing its work efficiently; that, as well as giving service for the present, it was storing up knowledge for the future. It was a warranty that tomorrow’s hospital patients would benefit from what was learned today. Pathology departments in new hospitals considered establishment of a cross file a priority task. In older, established centers the type of cross file varied. Some were straightforward and simple, others elaborate and complex, providing research and statistical data as well as information for day-to-day work. But, simple or elaborate, all had one thing in common: their usefulness in comparing a present case against others in the past. To David Coleman the absence of a cross file at Three Counties could be described with only one word: criminal.

Until this moment, despite his outward impression that the pathology department of Three Counties was seriously in need of changes, he had tried to withhold any personal opinion on Dr. Joseph Pearson. The old man had, after all, been operating alone for a long time, and the amount of work involved in a hospital this size could not have been easy for one pathologist to handle. That kind of pressure could account for the inadequate procedure which Coleman had already discovered in the lab, and, while the fault was not excusable, at least it was understandable.

It was possible, too, that Pearson might have been strong in other ways. In David Coleman’s opinion good administration and good medicine usually went together. But, of the two, medicine—in this case pathology—was the more important. He knew of too many whited sepulchers where gleaming chrome and efficient paper work ranked first, with medicine coming in a poor second. He had considered it possible that the situation here might be the reverse—with administration poor and pathology good. This was the reason he had curbed his natural tendency to judge the older pathologist on the basis of what had been evident so far. But now he found it impossible to pretend any longer to himself. Dr. Joseph Pearson was a procrastinator and incompetent.

Trying to keep the contempt out of his voice, Coleman asked, “What do you propose?”

“There’s one thing I can do.”

Pearson had gone back to his desk and picked up the telephone. He pressed a button labeled “Intercom.” After a pause, “Tell Bannister to come in.”

He replaced the phone, then turned to Coleman. “There are two men who are experts in this field—Chollingham in Boston and Earnhart in New York.”

Coleman nodded. “Yes, I’ve heard of their work.”

Bannister entered. “Do you want me?” He glanced at Coleman, then pointedly ignored him.

“Take these slides.” Pearson closed the folder and passed it across the desk. “Get two sets off tonight—air mail, special delivery, and put on an urgent tag. One set is to go to Dr. Chollingham at Boston, the other to Dr. Earnhart in New York. Get the usual covering notes typed; enclose a copy of the case history, and ask both of them to telegraph their findings as quickly as possible.”

“Okay.” The slide folder under his arm, Bannister went out.

At least, Coleman reflected, the old man had handled that part of it efficiently. Getting the two expert opinions in this case was a good idea, cross file or not.

Pearson said, “We ought to get an answer within two or three days. Meanwhile I’d better talk to Lucy Grainger.” He mused. “I won’t tell her much. Just that there’s a slight doubt and we’re getting”—he looked sharply at Coleman—“some outside confirmation.”

Date: 2014-12-21; view: 695