Drilling machine not working during skull operation: PGI Chandigarh, doctor directed to pay Rs 15 lakh compensation

Written by Sanchari Chattopadhyay Published On 2020-11-29T15:20:16+05:30 | Updated On 29 Nov 2020 3:20 PM IST

Drilling machine not working during skull operation: PGI Chandigarh, doctor directed to pay Rs 15 lakh compensation

Delhi: Upholding the decision of the state commission, the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has directed PGI Chandigarh and a doctor to jointly pay an increased compensation of Rs 15 lakh for medical negligence during a skull operation, wherein, a part of the skull had to be cut and removed for clipping of aneurysm.

This came after a complainant alleged that her mother was admitted to the hospital but due to the negligence and inefficiency of the doctor and the hospital, the patient had to go through surgery again as the drilling machine was unavailable during the first surgery.

Also Read: Doctors to be airlifted, more beds, increased testing: Amit Shah on tackling Covid surge in Delhi

The complainant submitted that the patient was diagnosed with a right internal carotico ophthalmic aneurysm. She was operated on for "clipping of aneurysm". The brain surgery was started under anesthesia; however, it was abandoned due to unavailability of the drill, allegedly without clipping of aneurysm. She operated once again. However, she expired the next day.

The complainants then filed a complaint before the State Commission alleging negligence and deficiency. The petitioner alleged that the drill machine did not work properly, so the operation was not completed and the skull was closed without clipping the Aneurysm.

However, the counsel for the respondent doctor and hospital refused to accept the allegations and submitted that, "the drill was not necessary and operations in the past had been performed even without a drill machine. He admitted that the drill machine was available but did not function satisfactorily ."

The counsel for the hospital further stated that the first operation and the second operation were successful, the patient was fully conscious, and therefore postponing the operation was not the cause of death.

After considering the submission of both the parties, the court observed, " the accused were so negligent that they did not see before starting the operation whether they had drill machine which would be used when the need arose. They thought of it only after the operation was started and the drill machine which was borrowed did not function. It necessitated the closure of the skull without completing the operation."

The court further added that " conducting two operations on the skull when only one would have been sufficient would naturally cause the blood loss and aggravate the process of death. Not only blood loss but there was a delay of about 10 days in conducting the 2 operations which could have also aggravated the disease. "

The contention of the hospital that the second operation was successful cannot be accepted because the patient thereafter survived only for a day.

The State Commission had awarded compensation of Rs 2 lakh and following the doctor and hospital approached NCDRC,

The national commission observed, " After the failure of the first surgery, treating the situation as an emergency, ensuring that no infection or harm occurs to the Patient, undertaking the second surgery on first and top priority, were required and expected of the Hospital and the Doctor. There is, but, nothing on record, placed by the Hospital and the Doctor, to show that they treated the situation as such an emergency. The principal endeavor of the Hospital and the Doctor has been to anyhow justify the abandonment of the first surgery, and to anyhow argue that in any case a second surgery was subsequently undertaken for the purpose."

Finally, the court issued an order stating that

The Award made by the State Commission is modified as follows: The Hospital and the Doctor shall, jointly and severally, pay Rs. 15 lakh with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of death of the patient (08.10.1999) till its realisation and cost of litigation of Rs. 2.50 lakh to the Complainants within 6 weeks of the date of pronouncement of this Order.

To access the official judgment, click on the link below-

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-142881.pdf

National Consumer Dispute Redressal CommissionNCDRCmedical negligenceclipping of aneurysmpgi chandigarh

Sanchari Chattopadhyay

Sanchari Chattopadhyay has pursued her M.A in English and Culture Studies from the University of Burdwan, West Bengal. She likes observing cultural specificities and exploring new places.