IV Antibiotic Without test dose: Apollo Hospitals, Surgeon told to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation

The Doctor in his defense stated that he has instructed a duty nurse in the hospital to administer augmentin injection intravenously but he stated that he instructed to give test dose. It is not in dispute that augmentin injection has a combination of penicillin and when such high dose given to a child of 1 year 4 months test dose ought to have been given and it is necessary.

The doctor further added that the actual fact is that as on instructions the Duty Nurse reconstituted a drip of injection Augmentin at 11.15 am, gave a test does and after properly observing and ensuring that there were no adverse reactions, completed the full dose as a drip, by 11.45 am. Long after this, at 11.55 am, well after the drip was completed, the child started showing abnormal behavior and was restless. Immediately, as it was an emergency, resuscitation started by the available doctors.

The court observed that the main contention to be whether the test dose of the antibiotic was given or not.

The court noted that while the doctor had stated that he had directed the nurse to give a test dose, his statement here is contrary to his admission made in other proceedings that there is no proof for he having instructed for test dose. Complainants had pointed out that after the death of the child they lodged a complaint before the Karnataka Medical Council who held an inquiry and found the doctor guilty of Medical Negligent.

Further with the Cross Examination, it is clear that he did not spend some time with the child after surgery until the reaction of the medicine like augmentin was given. He also admitted that he was not present with the patient to take care, he prescribed administering augmentin injection over phone to a duty nurse. The sentence he has used is, he “prescribed injection Augmentin-straight advised I.V.” but he never stated that he had told the duty nurse to give test dose, the word “Straight” gives the meaning administer indicates not informed test dose.

The court noted the findings of the Karnataka Medical Council of that inquiry has given
a finding and held that there were no senior doctors to attend the emergency of the child of the complainants, the telephonic communication could not be established that doctor arrived to the hospital it was too late and held there is deficiency in service and violation of code of medical ethics and held that the death of child was due to “anaphylaxis” i.e. drug allergy. The hospital has also been warned in this regard by Karnataka Medical Council

With the above observations, the forum said that the doctor was held guilty for his professional negligence which is to be accountable by the hospital also. The court awarded a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/. Attached is the judgment of the case