Rs 7,76,000 Compensation slapped on Doctor for Medical Negligence During Hip-Bone Surgery

Howrah: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Howrah recently directed a Howrah-based doctor to pay Rs 7,76,000 as compensation to a man for medical negligence while conducting hip-bone surgery.

It was noted by the consumer court that the complainant had to seek treatment from several other doctors and undergo surgeries. Therefore, the Commission opined that the complainant was not cured under the treatment of the treating doctor.

The history of the case goes back to 2011 when the complainant had fallen on the road from his cycle and his hip-bone got seriously damaged and it required immediate operation. Therefore, the complainant rushed to Asoka Polyclinic and Nursing Home where Dr. Patel conducted the operation on his right hip-bone and cemented Thompson on the injured hip. Following this, the complainant was discharged.

However, after his discharge, he started feeling severe pain at the operated portion and ‘puss’ was oozing out from the ‘stitch’ and he found one piece of ‘gauge’ remained inside the operated portion, which was allegedly causing severe pain and infection.

The complainant argued that the ‘gauge’ was removed later by the person who was conducting dressing work and the complainant again visited the doctor and X-ray was done.

Despite taking medicine, the complainant’s pain did not subside. The complainant submitted that later he consulted Dr. Thakur and Dr. Sardar and they suggested for further operation in two stages.

The complainant further submitted that he consulted another Dr. Kundu for a 3rd opinion who supported the medical opinion passed by Dr. Sardar. It is alleged that thereafter the complainant went to Christian Medical College, Vellore where he was medically checked up by Dr Thomas who suggested for conducting operation in two stages and for such operation he was required to stay at Vellore for 6 months but due to financial stringency, the complainant was not prepared to stay there and therefore he came back to Kolkata.

The complainant pointed out that later he consulted Dr. Ganguly who did his first operation and discharged him after removal of ‘prosthesis and debriment’ which was implanted by the first treating doctor at the time of first operation and thereafter Dr. Ganguly conducted the 2nd operation.

It was submitted that currently the complainant can walk with the help of elbow crutches. It is further alleged that for gross negligence of the first treating doctor, the complainant had to move from place to place for medical treatment and in this process he incurred huge expenses of Rs 4 lakh. He further submitted that the treating doctor had taken Dr. 76,000 for conducting operation at the nursing home.

On the other hand, the treating doctor denied medical negligence and submitted that the complainant was discharged in a stable condition with an advice to follow up after 4 (four) weeks or ‘SOS’ and also advised regular dressing and asked the patient to take antibiotics. He further submitted that there was no evidence that ‘gauge’ was left inside the operated area. Therefore, the doctor prayed to the District Commission for dismissing the case with heavy cost.

The nursing home also supported the version of the doctor stating that there was no latches and negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the nursing home and the doctor.

While considering the question whether there was any medical negligence by the nursing home and the doctor, the District Consumer Court perused the case record and noted the subsequent bewilderment of the complainant in rushing to the chambers of 4 to 5 Doctors.

The consumer court noted that the operation done by the treating doctor at the nursing home was not successful and the treating doctor was definitely negligent in conducting the operation.

Noting that the patient had to consult several other treatment and undergo further surgeries, the Commission noted, “All these factors are clearly reflecting that if the complainant was cured under the treatment of OP No. 1 Doctor, there is no necessity of complainant to take the help of other Doctors and to undergo further operation under Dr. Arindam Ganguly of West Bank Hospital.”

“ If this District Commission brash aside the complaint for removing of the gauge from the affected area, the negligent activity on the part of the OP No. 1 cannot be ignored. In this regard, the OPs time and again highlighted the argument in this case.,” it further noted.

The consumer court noted that the complainant did not pray for an expert opinion and there was no expert opinion in the case. However, at this outset, the Consumer Court observed that the complainant as a patient remained under the treatment of the first treating doctor for several months but he did not receive any healing of pain at his operated area although he took medicine as per the advice of the treating doctor systematically, he did not get any relief under the doctor’s treatment.

“In this regard, this District Commission should not be out of mind that if it was on 2 (two) stage operations , why the OP No. 1 failed to suggest the complainant of such double operation and here lies the ingredient of medical negligence as the OP No. 1 who poses to be an expert to the stream of orthopedics. Thus it is crystal clear that the complainant failure to bring expert evidence in this case is not at all fatal in the matter of proving his case. But fact remains that the evidence on record goes to show that there is no negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the OP No. 2 Nursing Home Authority,” the Commission noted at this outset.

Further noting that the complainant did not highlight serious allegation or claim against the Nursing Home Authority, the Commission observed, “Therefore, this District Commission is of the view that it is fit case where the prayer of the complainant is to be allowed as the medical negligence on the part of OP No. 1 has been established from the evidence on record.”

Therefore, allowing the complaint, the consumer court directed the treating doctor- Dr. Patel to pay Rs 4,76,000 to the complainant for committing medical negligence and for reimbursement of the total medical expenses incurred by the complainant since 16.02.2011.

Apart from this, the Commission also ordered the doctor to pay Rs 40,000 as the cost of the journey of the complainant from Kolkata to Vellore and for medical consultation at the Christian Medical College, Vellore.

Further, the commission directed the doctor to pay Rs 2,50,000 as compensation for causing mental pain, agony, and prolonged harassment to the complainant, who is a senior citizen. The doctor was also directed to pay Rs 10,000 to the complainant as litigation cost.

“So, OP No. 1 is directed to pay the total amount of Rs. 7,76,000 along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this case till realization of the said amount,” the Consumer Court ordered.

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/howrah-dcdrc-237919.pdf

Also Read: Madras HC Slaps Rs 2 Lakh Compensation on State for Sub-par post-operative treatment after Appendectomy