Doc negligence to be vetted against standard practice* Landmark judgement

*Doc negligence to be vetted against standard practice* Landmark judgement. Keep copy of it for ref.
May 30 2016 : The Times of India (Mumbai)

Jehangir B Gai


Medical science is not an exact science. There can be various reasons for failure of a treatment or surgery , which are beyond the control of the doctor. If a doctor has acted according to standard medical protocol he cannot be accused of negligence merely because some untoward incident has taken place due to circumstances beyond his control.

Sanghmitra Khobragade was suffering from abdominal pain. She went to the Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) at Nagpur and underwent sonography which revealed gall stones. She was referred to Dr Sanjay Gadekar for laparoscopic removal of stones.

Khobragade later filed a consumer complaint alleging that her consent was obtained on a blank form. The doctor then performed an open cholecystecto my instead of a laparoscopic surgery . She complained that despite oozing of yellowish fluid through the drain, she was discharged without being cured.

Khobragade subsequently developed jaundice for which GMCH asked her to contact a specialist. She was brought to Shrikhande Hospital in Mumbai where she underwent a major surgery of jejuno jejunostomy of the intestine. After an 8.5hour surgery she recovered and was discharged. She attributed that the obstructive jaundice was due to a wrong surgery by Dr Sanjay Gadekar and claimed a compensation of Rs 8.5 lakh for alleged negligence.

The state commission allowed the complaint and directed Dr Gadekar to pay Rs 8.5 lakh along with 9% interest and cost of Rs 25,000. The doctor challenged this order before the National Commission. The doctor relied on medical texts which showed that iatrogenic injuries occur inadvertently during certain medical procedures. In cholecystectomy , an incidence of over 85% iatrogenic injuries is noticed during follow-up. In such circumstances, it would not be right to attribute negligence on the part of the surgeon.

The doctor showed that consent had been properly obtained. The patient was in good condition at the time of discharge. The complication due to the iatrogenic injury was notice during follow up, for which Khobragade was advised to get herself admitted for corrective measures, but she had refused to get hospitalized again.

The National Commission observed that the patient was a qualified advocate. The doctor had obtained proper consent on the form which had been signed by Khobragade as well as her husband. The medical record showed there were no problems during the surgery . Extra hepatic biliary obstruction, which is a known complication of cholecystectomy , which was detected during follow up, but the patient had refused treatment.

The Commission observed that all medical injuries do not that all medical injuries do not arise due to negligence, and some complications occur due to blameless events. The Consumer Protection Act should not act as an “halter round the neck“ of doctors to make them fearful and apprehensive of taking professional decisions at crucial moments, which can make a difference to between life and death, it added.

ImpactConclusion: Accordingly , by the commision's order dated 20.5.2015 delivered by Dr S M Kantikar for the bench along with Justice J M Malik, the National Commission held that there was no negligence on Dr Gadekar's part.On the contrary Khobragade had failed to follow instruction for post operative complications. So the commission set aside the State Commission's order, and dismissed Khobragade's complaint.

A medical practitioner would be liable only where his conduct falls below that of the standards of a reasonably competent practitioner in his field.

(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt.

of India's National Youth Award for Consumer Pro tection. His email is jehangir.gai.co

This message is a forwarded from a what's up group,expecting it be authentic and publish here to help fellow colleagues. Courtesy unknown author.