Aseptic Technique


Semmelweiss was troubled by the frightengly high number of women dying in some delivery suites in the early 19th century – more than 10%. At that time bacteria had not yet been discovered. However, Semmelweiss recognised that aseptic technique could dramatically reduce the maternal mortality.

Semmelweiss asthetic technique article
Ignaz Semmelweiss

(b. Buda, Hungary, 1 July 1818: d. Vienna, Austria, 13 August 1865).

Semmelweis was among the most prominent medical figures of his time. His discovery concerning the aetiology and deterrence of puerperal fever was a brilliant example of fact-finding, purposeful analytical analysis, and keen inductive reasoning. The extremely successful prophylactic hand washings made him a pioneer in antisepsis throughout the prebacteriological era in spite of purposeful opposition and unenlightened resistance.

In the fall of 1837, Semmelweis traveled to Vienna, ostensibly to enroll in its law school. His father desired him to become a military supporter in the service of the Austrian bureaucracy. Soon after his arrival, nonetheless, he was drawn in to medication; and seemingly without parental opposition he matriculated in the medical school.

After willingly going to seminars led by these instructors, Semmelweis completed his botanically oriented dissertation early in 1844. He remained in Vienna after graduation, repeating a two-month course in practical midwifery and receiving a master’s degree in the subject. He likewise completed some surgical training and spent virtually fifteen months (October 1844– February 1846) with Skoda finding out analytical and diagnostic methods. Semmelweis used for the position of assistant in the First Obstetrical Facility of the university’s training institution, the Vienna General Medical facility.

In July of 1846 Semmelweis became the house policeman of the First Clinic, which was then under the instructions of Johann Klein. Amongst his numerous duties were the instruction of medical pupils, assistance at procedures, and the regular performance of all medical examinations. Among the most urgent issues facing him was the high maternal and neonatal death due to puerperal fever, 13.10 percent. Strangely enough, nonetheless, the Second Obstetrical Clinic in the same hospital exhibited a much lower death rate, 2.03 percent. The only distinction between them lay in their feature. The First was the training service for medical students, while the Second had actually been picked in 1839 for the instruction of midwives. Although everyone was baffled by the contrasting mortality figures, no clear explanation for the differences was forthcoming. The illness was thought about to be an inevitable component of contemporary hospital-based obstetrics, a product of unknown agents running in conjunction with elusive atmospheric conditions.

After a temporary demotion to allow the reinstatement of his predecessor, who soon left Vienna for a professorship at Tübingen, Semmelweis resumed his post in March 1847. Throughout his short getaway in Venice, the tragic death of his buddy Jakob Kolletschka, teacher of forensic medicine, happened after his finger was accidentally pierced with a knife throughout a postmortem examination. Remarkably, Kolletschka’s own autopsy exposed a pathological circumstance akin to that of the women who were passing away from puerperal fever.

Prepared with his extensive pathological training with Rokitansky, who had actually placed all cadavers from the gynecology ward at his disposal for dissection, Semmelweis made a vital organization. This startling hypothesis led Semmelweis to devise a story system of prophylaxis in May 1847. In spite of early protests, particularly from the medical pupils and hospital staff, Semmelweis was able to impose the brand-new procedure strongly; and in barely one month the mortality from puerperal fever declined in his center from 12.24 percent to 2.38 percent.

Vienna 1830 aseptic technique

Vienna 1830

In spite of the remarkable practical results of his washings, Semmelweis refused to interact his approach formally to the discovered circles of Vienna, nor was he eager to describe it on paper. Hence, Hebra finally wrote two short articles in his behalf, clarifying the etiology of puerperal fever and highly advising use of chlorinated lime as a preventive. Foreign doctors and the leading members of the Viennese school were impressed by Semmelweis’ apparent discovery, the documents failed to generate prevalent support.
During 1848 Semmelweis gradually expanded his prophylaxis to consist of all instruments being available in contact with clients in labor. His statistically documented success in virtually doing away with puerperal fever from the healthcare facility ward caused efforts by Skoda to develop an official commission to explore the results. The proposal was eventually declined by the Ministry of Education, nonetheless, a casualty of the political struggle between the defeated liberals of the 1848 motion and the newly empowered conservatives in both the government and the college bureaucracy.

Angered by beneficial reports worrying the brand-new methods that indirectly represented an indictment of his own beliefs and actions, Klein refused to reappoint Semmelweis in March 1849. Undaunted, he made an application for an unpaid instructorship in midwifery. In the meantime he started to perform animal experiments to prove his clinical conclusions with the help of the physiologist Ernst Brücke and a grant from the Vienna Academy of Sciences.
Semmelweis was at last encouraged to present his searchings for personally to the regional medical area. Faced with financial troubles in supporting his family, and perhaps discouraged, Semmelweis suddenly left the Austrian capital, returning to Pest without notifying even his closest pals.

In Hungary, Semmelweis found a backwards and depressed political and clinical setting following the pressing defeat of the liberals in the transformation of 1848. Despite the undesirable circumstances, he managed to get an honorary visit and organized the maternity ward of Pest’s St. Rochus Hospital in May 1851, continuing to be there until 1857. He soon was able to execute his brand-new prophylaxis against puerperal fever, with excellent success, while building a considerable private practice.

Following the death of the incumbent, Semmelweis was appointed by the Austrian Ministry of Education to the chair of theoretical and useful midwifery at the University of Pest in July 1855, although he had actually been just the 2nd selection of the neighborhood medical professors. Semmelweis additionally became energetic in college affairs, serving on committees dealing with medical education, medical services, and collection organization.

In 1861 Semmelweis lastly published his special discovery in publication form. The work was written in German and discussed, at length, the historical situations bordering his discovery of the source and deterrence of puerperal fever. A number of unfavorable foreign evaluations of the book prompted Semmelweis to lash out against his critics in a series of open letters written in 1861– 1862, which did bit to advance his ideas.
After 1863 Semmelweis’ enhancing bitterness and frustration at the lack of acceptance of his approach lastly broke his hitherto indomitable spirit. He became pathologically enraged and at the same time apathetic about his mission as a rescuer of mothers. In July 1865 Semmelweis suffered exactly what seemed a form of mental illness; and after a trip to Vienna imposed by pals and loved ones, he was committed to an asylum, the NiederÃusterreichische Heil – und pflegeanstalt. He died there just two weeks later on, the victim of a generalized sepsis ironically like that of puerperal fever, which had actually ensued from a surgically infected finger.

Semmelweis’ achievement should be considered against the medical milieu of his time. The ontological concept of condition firmly insisted ion particular illness entities that could be distinctly correlated both scientifically and pathologically. Puerperal fever, however, displayed numerous and varying anatomical localizations and a baffling symptomatology closely associated with the development of generalized sepsis. The noticeable connection in between this fever and erysipelas further clouded the issue. The concept of a particular contagion triggering the condition was not borne out by the medical experience.

In the face of such theoretical skepticisms and the profusion of sources attributable to the condition, Semmelweis showed a brilliant approach obtained from his teachers at the Second Vienna Medical School. He partially fixed the puzzle with considerable and precise dissections of those who had actually caught the condition, at some point acknowledging the vital resemblances of all septic states. The methodical exclusion of feasible etiological factors– one variable at a time– followed Skoda’s diagnostic procedure, while the work of statistical information was transferred from healing analysis to the elucidation of the definitive aspect responsible for the condition. In finally reaching his discovery, Semmelweis effectively seized upon his inbuilt control group of ladies at the Second Facility, a privileged situation exceptional in other places.

Further, political feuds led to an identification of Semmelweis with the liberal and reform-oriented faction of the Viennese medical faculty, a team briefly prevented in their goals by the pressing defeat of 1848. Operating from a politically suppressed and scientifically backward nation with a second-rate college, Semmelweis was efficiently hindered in the promulgation of his concepts. Most crucial, however, was the absence of a good explanation for Semmelweis’ empirically obtained procedure, an advancement made feasible only through the occurring work of Pasteur.

aseptic technique womens healthThis is the personal website of David A Viniker MD FRCOG, retired Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist – Specialist Interests – Reproductive Medicine including Infertility, PCOS, PMS, Menopause and HRT.
I do hope that you find the answers to your women’s health questions in the patient information provided.

The aim of this web site is to provide a general guide and it is not intended as a substitute for a consultation with an appropriate specialist in respect of individual care and treatment.

David Viniker retired from active clinical practice in 2012.
In 1999, he setup this website – – to provide detailed
information many of his patients requested. The website attracts thousands of visitors every day from around the world.
Website optimisation (SEO) has became more than an active hobby. If you would like advice on your website, please visit his websites Page 1 on Google and Keyword SEO PRO or email him on