No signed consent, records for surgery: Rs 22 lakh compensation slapped on Punjab doctor, hospital for medical negligence
Medical Negligence
Faridkot: Holding a Muktsar-based doctor and hospital guilty of medical negligence, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Faridkot recently directed them to pay Rs 22 lakh compensation to a patient, who lost career opportunities abroad due to the negligent treatment.
The Commission bench comprising President Rakesh Kumar Singla and member Param Pal Kaur on July 23 directed the Laparoscopic & General Surgeon, his Hospital and Oriental Insurance Company Limited to comply with the order within 45 days.
The Court found that the doctor and hospital failed to maintain proper records, did not provide a discharge summary, and conducted the surgery without a signed consent form. The ultrasound report justifying the procedure was also not properly documented.
The complaint in this regard was filed by the complainant, who hails from Shaheed Balwinder Singh Nagar in Faridkot town, back on February 10, 2021.
As per the latest media report by Hindustan Times, the complainant submitted that he was studying in New Zealand to pursue a diploma in 'Business Level 5' and for this he paid NZ$16,100 for one year starting November 26, 2018. He submitted that when he flew to India in January 2019 to meet his parents, he complained of abdominal pain and was taken to the treating doctor, who advised an ultrasound test.
The report showed a suspicion of calculus measuring 5-6 mm in the patient's gallbladder fundus. The treating doctor suggested the patient for laser surgery.
Another ultrasound test was conducted, and thereafter, the doctor allegedly recommended cholecystectomy, a surgical intervention to remove the gallbladder.
On the other hand, the doctor and the hospital submitted that they identified a rare complication during an intraoperative procedure, and another surgery was done. Following this, the patient complained of swelling in the abdomen, and he was taken to a private hospital in Ludhiana.
The doctor and the hospital also denied the allegations of negligence levelled by the complainant and termed his plea an ulterior motive to extract money from them.
After taking note of the submissions by both parties, the Commission found that the charges of medical negligence to be true. The Commission observed,
"no discharge summary has been brought on record by the treating doctor to verify the fact that what procedure was adopted by the doctor and the hospital in treating the patient. There is nothing on record what kind of advice or instructions were given to the complainant regarding his medication and for follow-up. They have not placed on record a consent form showing the signatures of the complainant or his parents, which was mandatory before doing any surgery."
It was also mentioned in the order that there was no record of the review ultrasound that confirmed the diagnosis of gallbladder stones, and therefore, the surgery for suspicious gallstones was not justified.
Further, the Commission also noted that when the patient was referred to a medical institute, no medical record or any relevant investigations conducted on him on that day were provided.
