Relief of Approximately Rs 3.5 Crore to Neurosurgeon and Hospital, NCDRC holds no medical negligence In Lumber Spinal Surgery

Patna: Granting relief to a Neurosurgeon and Patna-based hospital, the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has exonerated them from the charges of medical negligence during lumber spinal surgery. Dismissing the plea, the court held that there was no negligence or deficiency in the services by the Neurosurgeon and the Tara Hospital, and the patient was treated with a reasonable duty of care.

The plea seeking Rs 3.48 crore compensation was filed in the year 2006 when the patient died. It was alleged that there was a delay of about 22 hours in the surgical intervention of the patient which caused further brain damage and hence, due to irreversible deterioration the patient could not be saved.

Also Read:Stitches open after hysterectomy: NCDRC exonerates UP doctor, nursing home from allegations of negligence

The case goes back to the year 2006 when the patient slipped and sustained a head injury, though conscious his speech was impaired. The next day he was taken to the neurologist Dr Ashok Kumar Singh who after a CT Scan and examining the patient, referred him to the neurosurgeon for surgery.

The neurosurgeon Dr RB Sharma examined the patient and advised immediate brain surgery. The patient was admitted to the Tara Hospital on 10th January 2006.

The CT Scan revealed that the brain condition of the patient deteriorated due to a delay in the surgery. However, the patient was operated on and shifted to another hospital 5kms away as the ICU ward was not available in the Tara Hospital.

Also Read:Loss of Vision After Surgery: Tiruvarur Govt Medical College Hospital Dean, Collector slapped Rs 5 lakh compensation

A CT Scan was again done that revealed hematoma in the brain of the patient, and a second operation was performed where the neurosurgeon closed the brain by putting a flap.

It was alleged by the aggrieved that the second operation was performed as a cover-up for the negligence caused during the first operation, however, the neurosurgeon failed to control the bleeding of the patient after the second operation that caused brain dead and the patient thus died on 14th January 2006.

The aggrieved, therefore, approached the NCDRC for the case of alleged medical negligence and prayed for a compensation of Rs 3.48 crores from the neurosurgeon and Tara Hospital.

The neurosurgeon and the Hospital denied all the allegations. They submitted that there was a history of the patient being a chronic alcoholic and he was brought to the hospital after 24 hours after the fall and was in a confused state of mind.

Also Read:No negligence in treatment of Seborrheic Dermatitis: Consumer forum relief to Dermatologist, Polyclinic

It was submitted that the patient was attended to and reasonable care was taken of him. All the vitals were checked and all the standard care was given and subsequently carefully transferred to the Magadh Hospital.

It was also submitted that the patient's wife did not accompany him while he was being shifted and all the details and prognosis were carefully told to the patient's brother.

It was also submitted that postoperatively the condition of the patient was critical, and the neurosurgeon suggested elective ventilation, therefore after obtaining consent patient was shifted to ICU at Magadh Hospital by ambulance. At no stage, the attendants were assured about recovery from the critical condition. In spite of all the best efforts the patient died, and there was no negligence on the part of the treating doctor and hospital.

Also Read:NCDRC exonerates Cardiologist, Hospital of Negligence in implating pacemaker

The Tara Hospital in its written version also submitted that the hospital is one of the reputed in Patna and well equipped having the latest technology and modern facilities and that there was no single complaint since the inception of the hospital.

After hearing both sides, the court noted down that the patient was a chronic alcoholic and suffered an accidental head injury due to a slip and that the treating doctors had told the attendants about the prognosis of such head injury and the mortality. The court observed from the medical record that it was evident that the patient was under observation as requested by the attendants. The court also made a note of all the material on record and the OT Notes and the case details and issued that there was no negligence during the preoperative or operation stage or at the post-operative stage for Tara Hospital or in Magadh Hospital.

On the medical services back in the year 2006, the bench mentioned –

"It is pertinent to note that in the year 2006, the MRI facilities and CT scan facilities were not easily available in hospitals of Patna, even the state-owned Hospital PMCH was not having MRI Facility. The ICU Facility itself started in the year 2007 at Patna Medical College and Hospital. Therefore considering the circumstances, the OP-2 cannot be held liable for having adequate infrastructure. From the literature, the mortality rate of patients having SDH is 40-60%, and the functional recovery rate is 40%. Therefore, death of the patient cannot be attributed to medical negligence on the part of either of the Opposite Parties."

The court while reviewing previously decided cases by the Supreme Court held that there was no medical negligence or deficiency in the services of the neurosurgeon or the Tara Hospital.

"Based on the forgoing discussion, in the instant case, the medical negligence is not conclusively established against the Opposite Parties and his team, who have performed the lumber spinal surgery withreasonable duty of care.

The Complaint fails. It is dismissed."

To read the order, click below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/medico-legal-1-195345.pdf