University of Otago and reached the stage when he could sit for the Mus. Bac. degree—a truly out- standing effort at his age.
He then spent a prolonged visit to England, further exploiting his interest in music. He devel- oped a deep interest in the ancient churches of London and compiled a vast manuscript dealing with their history and origins. On his return to Dunedin in 1961, he was immensely busy prepar- ing it for publication, but this was not to be—he died suddenly after a brief illness.
He was a foundation fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. The British Orthopaedic Association honored him by electing him an emeritus fellow and the New Zealand Orthopedic Association its patron.
James Renfrew White was a truly remarkable man, vivacious, erudite and immensely versatile.
He more than anyone else was the pioneer and founder of orthopedic and traumatic surgery in New Zealand. By the death of James Renfrew White of Dunedin on December 27, 1961, New Zealand lost the doyen of her orthopedic surgeons.
Boston. He was a charter member of the Tavern Club in Boston. He went to New York in 1889 and became associated with Dr. Virgil P. Gibney, at the Hospital for the Ruptured and Crippled.
The association with this hospital continued until 1929, when, after 40 years of continuous service, he retired from both hospital and private practice.
He moved to England, where he remained for about 13 years, returning to his own country in 1943.
He died in New York City on August 19, 1946.
Three days before his death, he received an invi- tation to represent the United States, as a guest of the French Government, at a meeting to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the French Academy of Surgery.
Dr. Whitman was a member of many medical organizations, both in United States and abroad, but he valued most his fellowship in the Royal College of Surgeons, and his membership in the American Orthopedic Association, of which he was president in 1895.
He was an indefatigable worker. He was of the opinion that, in orthopedics, the outpatient department or clinic was an indispensable and integral part of the service. The patients were seen first in the outpatient department and, after their stay in the hospital for operative or nonoperative treatment, returned to it for follow-up care or observation. This unit of service included both indoor and dispensary care. Hence, he, as well as all of his associates, attended the outpatient clinic.
The clinic hours ran from one to three in the after- noon, and so prompt was his arrival that watches could be set at one o’clock when he entered the hospital. He had little patience with an assistant who came late or who offered excuses for ir- regular attendance. In this, as in so many other respects, he set his assistants an excellent example.
Dr. Whitman loved orthopedic surgery and sought continuously and zealously to advance it.
To those who saw him and worked with him 4 or 5 days a week, he seemed to be thinking of nothing but orthopedics. During a lull in clinic work in the afternoons, the subject discussed was never art, literature, music, or politics, but always orthopedic surgery, a difficult case for diagnosis, surgical technique, mechanical or surgical prin- ciples, or orthopedic literature. Dr. Whitman read extensively and was thoroughly informed on the orthopedic literature in English, French, and German; he expected all of his associates to be equally well informed and up to date, so that dis- 358
Who’s Who in Orthopedics
Royal WHITMAN
1857–1946
Royal Whitman was born in Portland, Maine, on October 24, 1857. He received his degree of Doctor of Medicine from Harvard Medical School in 1882, and for a while he practiced in
cussions, which were very frequent, would be most fruitful and thought-provoking.
Dr. Whitman was a profound student of ortho- pedic surgery, a pioneer, and a pathfinder. He was always trying out new procedures, either those he initiated or those suggested by others. He had an insatiable curiosity about the pathogenesis of orthopedic diseases and deformities, and an imag- ination that led him continuously to seek new methods of manipulative or surgical correction of musculoskeletal defects. He was his own sternest critic and never reported favorably upon any technique or procedure until he himself was thoroughly convinced of its usefulness. When he became convinced of the value of any treatment, he would, through addresses or medical essays, hammer away at the profession until his opinion was accepted.
Despite his intense interest in operative surgery, he never overlooked the opportunities and advantages of manipulative treatment or the manual correction of deformities, of which he was a master. Although short of stature and thin, he many times surprised his young and more vig- orous assistants by the rapidity and ease with which he would correct a resistant deformity over which they had labored ineffectually. In the days when the use of great manual force was condoned in the correction of a club foot or the reduction of a congenital dislocation of the hip, he exhibited remarkable dexterity and strength in overcoming manually the resistance of contracted tissues and overcorrecting a deformity.
Dr. Whitman was particularly insistent upon a thorough knowledge of mechanical principles, the pathology of deformities, and the observance of these in therapeutics. Braces to him were intended for the support of the trunk or limbs, and not for the correction of deformities. First, an equino varus of the foot, a flexion at the hip or the knee, or a rigid flat foot had to be corrected; then, and only then, might the surgeon apply a brace. Woe to the assistant who did not obey this rule!
Dr. Whitman was truly a master surgeon. He was second to none in speed, dexterity, thor- oughness and careful handling of tissues. He reli- giously avoided undue or excessive trauma, and was ever mindful of the fact that the recovery of tissues operated upon depended directly upon the gentleness with which they were treated. “Treat the tissues lovingly” was the unwritten but ever- present motto of the amphitheater. Two factors contributed outstandingly to Dr. Whitman’s case and speed at the operating table. He was an excel-
lent anatomist and, through hints dropped here and there, it was evident that he kept reviewing anatomy; second, on the day before an operation he continuously reviewed what he contemplated doing, and hence he came to the operating table with a definite plan of procedure. He avoided complicated operations, believing that the goal could be attained through simple measures.
He always avoided multiple operations at one session, on the basis that the usual orthopedic operation was rarely an emergency procedure, and that the end result would be better if he used several simple separate operations.
He taught orthopedic surgery for 40 years, both at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University and at the Hospital for the Ruptured and Crippled. His love for orthopedic surgery made him a most generous teacher, who sought to transmit his experiences and informa- tion to whoever showed an interest and would listen. His method of teaching was not always a placid procedure. He often used the difficult, and not always agreeable, method of sarcastic criti- cism. This at times was vexing. His students, however, soon recognized the light in his eyes and the smile on his lips, and knew that there was no malice in the sarcasm. He meant only to em- phasize indelibly some point in observation, diagnosis, or surgical technique. To the less understanding students and visitors, this peda- gogic method was disconcerting. Those who knew Dr. Whitman well, however, realized that when he was sarcastic he would teach much.
As an investigator and teacher, Dr. Whitman was undoubtedly one of the great contributors to the advancement of orthopedic surgery in the United States. His textbook on orthopedic surgery is a classic. Dr. Whitman contributed a great many essays on orthopedic problems. These were pub- lished in English, but often were translated or abstracted in foreign languages, so that his teach- ings went to every corner of the world and to all medical circles. Dr. Whitman originated several methods of treatment, which have been univer- sally acknowledged and adopted as classical pro- cedures in orthopedic surgery. He initiated the abduction treatment for fractures of the hip. His insistence on a method that created the opportu- nity for repair of the fractured hip gave the impetus to extensive clinical research and to the splendid progress that has been made in the early part of Twentieth Century in the management of fractures at the hip. He devised the operation of astragalectomy and backward displacement of the 359
Who’s Who in Orthopedics
foot for paralytic calcaneus, an operation that formerly was generally accepted for stabilization of the paralytic calcaneus foot. Dr. Whitman’s exhaustive studies on flat or weak feet led to the establishment of a most effective system of treat- ment, including the use of the Whitman foot brace. His contributions to orthopedic surgery become incalculable when one contemplates the many physicians whom he instructed and inducted into orthopedic surgery.
sion and to his patients. He often worked day and night together with his collaborators to care for seriously ill people.
From his students he demanded precision work and dedication to the task in hand. If an unex- pected bad result of a treatment happened, all collaborators had to analyze the case together in order to learn the relevant lessons and to find a better solution for the future. It was not usual for his trainees to come in for ready praise and, at times, he exhibited certain eccentricities. When assisting an operation as a teacher, he would ensure that no mistakes were made, and was even known to have tapped an errant student’s hand with a clamp. Notwithstanding, Wi—the nick- name given to him in the hospital—enjoyed the greatest respect and devotion of all collaborators.
H. Rozetter, the administrative director of the hospital, characterized his work with the follow- ing words:
H. Willenegger has remained the same during his whole career. A medical doctor, who was able to talk to his patients and their relatives in a simple and clear way, in whom all of them had confidence, because they felt there was someone speaking to them who was willing to give his best to cure them of their ills. He represented a person of character, tirelessly fighting against any over-estimation of one’s abilities and who accepted only one claim: the one of faithfully follow- ing the path of duty.
Hans Willenegger—most frequently called in the Bernese way “Hausi”—held one of the five central positions in the founding committee of the AO in 1958. We do well to focus upon the very personal contribution of H. Willenegger to this institution’s evolution. Having to cope with a wide spectrum of traumatology, he realized early the imperfection of the outcome.
He therefore introduced the complete docu- mentation of all osteosyntheses in 1958. With great care he analyzed the published work, deal- ing with different operative methods to improve fracture outcome, in particular the writings of F. König, for whom he had a great respect and admiration. After coming to recognize, through M.E. Müller, the work of A. Lambotte and R. Danis, he quickly realized that a scientific basis for this impressive technical knowledge was lacking. Thanks to his initiative, links were forged with Straumann, a metallurgical research institute, who helped to solve problems with the implant material. Out of this collaboration arose the industrial production of Synthes implants and 360
Who’s Who in Orthopedics
Hans Robert WILLENEGGER
1910–1998
Hans Willenegger spent his youth in the alpine area near Bern, the city where later he studied medicine. He then trained to become a general surgeon with O. Schürch in Winterthur. When Schürch was elected to the chair of surgery at the University of Basel, H. Willenegger was invited to accompany his teacher, and there he was pro- moted as a lecturer on the subject of blood trans- fusions. In 1953 H. Willenegger was appointed as the head of the Kantonsspital Liestal, a district hospital near Basel, where at the time of his elec- tion there was, as yet, no specialization. At the beginning, therefore, he was responsible for all somatic patients. During the 10 following years, specialization evolved and, by 1962, he was able to move to a modern hospital building with five individual departments. He proved to be a clini- cian with an exceptional devotion to his profes-
