No surgery despite consent: Consumer forum absolves orthopaedic surgeon, hospital of medical negligence, deficiency of service
Advertisement
Jalandhar: The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission of Jalandhar has recently dismissed a case of medical negligence and deficiency of service against an orthopaedic surgeon and a hospital wherein the patient had alleged that the doctor and hospital, instead of performing surgery for which the consent was given, only covered the left hand of the patient with plaster and she had to suffer a huge amount of pain as a result.
The commission had dismissed the charges observing, "She had the fracture for which doctors treating her earlier have opined for POP and condition in which she was POP treatment was the best opinion as the surgery could have risked her life."
The case concerns the patient who moved to the hospital for treatment with complaints of displaced/broken bone of the left arm. The doctor advised surgery as a treatment. The husband of the complainant brought the medicines for the operation and provided them to the treating doctor in the operation hall.
However, the doctor did not perform the operation but he had put a plaster on the left arm of the patient, the plea submitted. The patient objected to the conduct of the doctor not performing the operation as consent was given for surgery of the left arm by the husband. After the second day, the patient again informed the doctor that her pain was very severe and unbearable. The treating doctor changed medicine but the medicine was not effective, resultantly pain did not decrease, the petitioner patient complained.
The patient was then shifted to another hospital and after examining all the treatment records, the treating doctor there advised surgery and as per the consent of the complainant, surgery was done and was successful.
The main grievance of the patient was that the doctor did not act as per the consent and did not perform the operation but only covered the left arm with plaster. The petitioner moved the consumer forum alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service.
The counsel for the hospital and the doctor denied the allegations and stated that the Anesthetist who was to assist in the surgery was also of the view that the patient was not in a stage to undergo surgery. It was also advised by the Anesthetist to the patient that after the treatment of POP, the wounds would stabilize after six weeks and then it would be ascertained whether she needed surgery or not, and she was asked to come for the follow-up action. The rest of the averments of the complainant was denied and they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
After deliberating the arguments of both parties, the commission observed that the doctor held the opinion that the patient needed treatment of POP as she is an aged 60-year-old patient and was overweight having her physical condition, not to the extent that she could withstand the surgery. The opinion of the Anesthetist who was to assist in the surgery also suggested that the patient was not fit to undergo surgery.
The doctor also stated that he examined the complainant for the purpose of suitability to undergo an operation and found that she was not conducive to undergo surgery. She had the fracture for which doctors treating her earlier have opined for POP and the condition in which she was POP treatment was the best opinion as the surgery could have risked her life, the bench noted and said:
"We find that the main grouses of the complainant are that firstly, her left arm has displaced/broken and need some surgery. Secondly when the treated doctor did not perform the duty as per the consent. We think that the above grouses of the complainant are not authenticated because the surgery given to the patient depends upon the doctor, not on the patient and the doctor perform ed his duty as per his knowledge and caliber and he cannot depend upon the consent of the patient because surgery or given proper treatments to the patient is regular routine work of the doctors as per their profession."
The commission referred to one of the apex court's observation and noted
A medical practitioner would be liable only, where his conduct fell below that of the standards of a reasonably competent practitioner in his field. Negligence cannot be attributed to a doctor so long as he performs his duties with reasonable skill and competence. It would not be conducive to the efficiency of the medical profession, if no doctor could administer medicine without a halter round his neck.
Finding that there is nothing on the record that the doctor and the hospital were not qualified doctors or they have not followed the medical protocol while prescribing the treatment of the complainant, the commission dismissed the complaint of the patient alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service.
In the absence of an expert doctor's report, we are unable to rely upon the bald submissions of the complainant in this regard, who is not a medical expert person in the medical science, attributing medical negligence to OPs. We are unable to come across any substance on the file to prove medical negligence on the part of OPs.
To view the order, click on the link below:
Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.