Kerala Consumer Court relief to urologist, hospital in kidney stone removal negligence case
No Medical Negligence
Thiruvananthapuram: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala, recently exonerated a Thiruvananthapuram-based hospital and its urologist from charges of medical negligence while conducting a kidney stone removal surgery on a patient.
The history of the case goes back to 2014 when the patient approached the treating doctor at the Thiruvananthapuram-based hospital with severe pain in the left portion of his stomach. After examining him and conducting tests, the treating doctor prescribed some medicines.
However, the complainant had stomach pain again after a few days. Therefore, an ultrasound scan was taken, which revealed that the patient had a kidney stone of 5 mm on the right side and two stones of 10mm and 6mm, respectively, on the left side.
Accordingly, the treating doctor prescribed some medicines and advised the complainant to come after 10 days. It was found that the stone on the right side had disappeared. However, there was no change in the two stones on the left side. Based on the doctor's advice, the complainant got admitted to the hospital and underwent surgery.
A few days later, he was having pain on the left side and consulted the doctor again. At that time, after analysing the X-ray, the doctor told the patient that there was a stone in the kidney and it had to be crushed. The complainant was advised to come after three months.
It was alleged that the treating doctor was concealing something, and it was due to the negligence of the doctor and the hospital, the patient had to sustain loss and injury. In the said circumstances, he filed a complaint alleging medical negligence against the treating doctor and hospital.
Before the District Commission, the treating doctor and hospital neither appeared nor filed any version. Meanwhile, the complainant filed a proof affidavit. After evaluating the evidence, the District Commission dismissed the complaint.
Consequently, the patient approached the State Commission and contended that prior to the operation, due to the administration of medicines by the doctor, the kidney stone on the right side vanished; hence the operation was conducted only for the purpose of crushing the kidney stones on the left side.
However, the Commission noted that apart from the said contention, no material was available on record to show that before the surgery, there were stones only in the left kidney.
"It is not discernible from the evidence on record whether the kidney stone on the right kidney alone was crushed and removed or not. The complainant also did not produce the discharge summary issued from the hospital," noted the Commission.
Noting that without the discharge summary, it was not possible to decide what treatment was given by the doctor. Accordingly, without proper evidence, the Commission upheld the District Commission's order and dismissed the complaint.
"Since the discharge summary was not produced, it is not discernible as to what treatment was given to the complainant by the 2 nd opposite party *doctor) in the 1 st opposite party hospital. In view of the above, merely because Exhibit P20 would show that there were two stones in the left kidney, it cannot be said that the operation conducted by the 2 nd opposite party was faulty. This being the evidence available on record, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the District Commission, dismissing the complaint," it observed.
To view the order, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/kerala-scdrc-no-med-negligence-308714.pdf
