Abstract
The post mortem examination has evolved through a protean range of interest, but remains a benchmark in the study of human disease. Originally performed for predominantly mystical or religious reasons the post mortem then became a vital tool in the teaching of anatomy to medical students. In fact papal bills had to be set out permitting students to dissect human bodies during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although it was recognised early that such examinations could be used to document the various changes that occurred with disease, it was not until some time later that the link between post mortem findings and clinical symptoms was developed. From that point onwards, with the recognition that organ appearances resulted from tissue changes and the birth of the discipline of Rokitansky’s Morbid Anatomy, later expanded in the establishment of the cellular basis of disease by Virchow, the post mortem had become a powerful tool in the study of human disease. Of course during this time the use of the post mortem examination as an essential instrument in the field of forensic medicine also developed.
Keywords
Maternal Death Royal College Safe Working Request Form High Risk CasePreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Dada MA, Ansari NA. The postmortem examination in diagnosis. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 965–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Slavin G et al. The autopsy and audit. London; Royal College of Pathologists, 1991.Google Scholar
- 3.Royal College of Pathologists. Guidelines for post mortem reports. London; Royal College of Pathologists, 1993.Google Scholar
- 4.Office for National Statistics, London 1996.Google Scholar
- 5.Chen K. The Coroner’s necropsy–an epidemiological treasure trove. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 698–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Procurator Fiscal, NHS Executive of the Scottish Office, Crown Office, Edinburgh, 1998.Google Scholar
- 7.Drife J. Maternal mortality: lessons from the confidential enquiry. Hosp Med 1999; 60: 156–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Royal College of Pathologists. Guidelines for the retention of tissues and organs at postmortem examination. London; Royal College of Pathologists, 2000.Google Scholar
- 9.Kavanagh G. Coroner’s rules and statutes. London; Sweet and Maxwell, 1985.Google Scholar
- 10.Hudson M. Rights of possession of human corpses. J Clin Pathol 1997; 50: 90–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Department of Health. Mortuary and post-mortem room, Health building note 20. London; HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
- 12.Bull AD, Channer J, Cross SS, Start RD, Kennedy A. Should eye protection be worn when performing necropsies? J Clin Pathol 1991; 44: 782.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Health Services Advisory Committee. Safe working and the prevention of infection in the mortuary and post-mortem room. London; HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
- 14.Health Services Advisory Committee. Safe working and the prevention of infection in clinical laboratories. London; HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
- 15.Health Services Advisory Committee. Safe working and the prevention of infection in clinical laboratories-model rules for staff and visitors. London; HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
- 16.Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Precautions for work with human and animal Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies. London; HMSO, 1994.Google Scholar
- 17.Bell JE, Ironside JW. How to tackle a possible Creutzfeld-Jakob disease necropsy. J Clin Pathol 1993; 46: 193–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Department of Health. Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Recommendations. London; HMSO, 1998.Google Scholar
- 19.Health and Safety at Work Act. London; HMSO, 1974.Google Scholar
- 20.Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Categorisation of pathogens according to hazard and categories of containment, 2nd edn. London; HMSO, 1990.Google Scholar
- 21.Royal Institute for Public Health and Hygiene. A handbook of mortuary practice and safety for Anatomical Pathology Technicians. London; RIPHH, 1991.Google Scholar
- 22.Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Memorandum on control of viral haemorrhagic fevers. London; HMSO, 1986.Google Scholar
- 23.Lucas SB. HIV and the necropsy. J Clin Pathol 1993; 46: 1071–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Royal College of Pathologists. HIV and the practice of pathology. London; Royal College of Pathologists, 1995.Google Scholar
- 25.Underwood JCE, Slater DN, Parsons MA. The needle autopsy. BMJ 1983; 286: 1632–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Wellman KF. The needle autopsy: a retrospective evaluation of 394 consecutive cases. Am J Clin Pathol 1969; 52: 441–4.Google Scholar
- 27.West M, Chomet B. An evaluation of needle necropsies. Am J Med Sci 1957; 234: 554–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar