Cardiac Arrest patient dies due to ICU delay: Wockhardt hospital Nashik slapped Rs 18 lakh compensation
Medical Negligence
Mumbai: Holding Nashik-based Workhardt Hospitals guilty of deficiency in service and medical negligence leading to the death of a patient from cardiac arrest in 2010, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently directed it to pay Rs 18 lakhs to the father of the deceased, along with 10 percent interest on the amount from 2010.
It was observed by the Commission that the complainant proved that there was a delay on the part of the hospital in shifting the patient to the ICU for treatment.
The history of the case goes back to 2010 when the complainant's son, a young boy, was admitted to the hospital for nose bleeding. The complainant alleged that on April 16, 2010, at around 3:00 AM, the patient fell while going to the bathroom and complained of chest pain and uneasiness. His condition worsened gradually. It was alleged that the doctors did not provide proper treatment immediately and the patient was not admitted to the ICU until 7:00 AM.
It was also contended by the complainant that from 7:00 AM to 11:00 AM on April 16, 2010, the hospital did not inform about the patient's condition to the relatives and the complainant was not allowed to meet the patient.
The complainant alleged that his son died at around 8:30 AM but the treatment was unnecessarily continued until 12:30 PM to create evidence of efforts to save his life. Ultimately, the patient was declared dead at around 8:50 PM on April 16.
In the complaint before the State Consumer Court, the complainant alleged that gross medical negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the hospital led to his son's untimely death. Further, the complainant alleged that despite the patient's critical condition warranting ICU admission, the hospital did not insist on it.
On the other hand, the hospital denied the allegations and claimed that the patient's father refused ICU admission. Vehemently denying the allegations of negligence, the hospital and its doctors insisted that all the protocols were followed. They claimed that the patient died due to long-standing medical conditions and his unilateral decision to stop prescribed antihypertensive medication 8-10 days before admission. This, the hospital argued, led to the accelerated hypertension and a fatal heart attack, leading to the patient's death.
As per the hospital, the patient had a complex medical history, including being a chronic smoker, occasional alcohol user, diagnosed with hypertension, suffering from dyslipidemia, and leading a sedentary lifestyle under stress.
Free Press Journal has reported that the hospital submitted that after admission on April 15, 2010, the patient had high blood pressure, which quickly rose and an ICU admission was advised. However, the patient and the relatives refused the same, as per the hospital's ICU register.
Further, the hospital claimed that extensive tests and treatments were administered, including antihypertensive medication, blood thinners, and nasal packing. According to the hospital, when the patient's condition worsened, he was shifted to the ICU at 6:15 AM, and despite intensive resuscitative measures, he was declared dead at 12:50 PM.
Referring to the patient's pre-existing conditions, all experts emphasised that stopping antihypertensive medication was a critical mistake. They consistently concluded that the death was due to cardiovascular complications from accelerated hypertension, aggravated by the patient's discontinuation of Betaloc. Further, they opined that the hospital provided timely, appropriate treatment within the standard of care.
Earlier, the District Consumer Commission had rejected the complainant's case. Consequently, in 2011, the Complainant filed an appeal against the District Commission's order before the State Consumer Commission.
On July 17, the State Consumer Court ruled in favour of the complainant and held the hospital guilty. In its order, the Commission presided by the President, Justice S.P. Tavade, and member Vijay C. Premchandani held that the complainant succeeded in proving that the hospital failed to shift the patient timely to the ICU. Therefore, the patient's right to receive competent and timely care was violated.
Accordingly, setting aside the District Forum's order dated June 30, 2011, the State Consumer Court directed the hospital to pay Rs 18 lakh compensation along with interest to the deceased's father.
