Fetal loss due to Wrong blood Transfusion = Compensation of Rs.15 lakh +

Fetal loss due to Wrong blood Transfusion = Compensation of Rs.15 lakh +..
Important Judgement indeed.

(the Hospital was vicariously held liable and MAJOR PORTION of compensation was saddled upon the Hospital)
The National Commission in the case of Dr. Anil Kumar Mittal V/s smt. Neelam Gupta & ors, R.P. No.3145/2008) held the Doctor as well as the Hospital for wrong blood Transfusion. (see the link http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do… )

The brief facts are as under :

1. The complainant (patient) Smt. Neelam Gupta gave birth to a male child on 04.12.1988 in SBD Hospital, Saharanpur, U.P. However she was advised Blood Transfusion after delivery, due to anemic condition of the patient. 

2. The petitioner herein,tested patient’s blood previously on 15.09.1988 as B +ve and therefore, one bottle of B +ve blood was issued from SBD hospital blood bank and transfused to the patient. Thereafter, till 1994, the patient became pregnant for four times, but every pregnancy resulted into fetal loss(death). 

3. In year 1994, during her 5th pregnancy, the patient got her blood group tested from the petitioner as B +ve, which was reconfirmed by Dr. Chandra at Arpit Diagnostic Laboratory as O +ve. Due to such disparity, the then Dr. Sareen, advised blood group from Dr. Vijay Laxmi Taneja, who reported it as B Negative on 15.11.1994. It was again reconfirmed by Dr. A.K. Jain on 16.11.1994 as B -ve !!!!

4. The complainant contended that the Doctor as well as the Hospital, both are at fault. Because the Doctor did not bother to cross match the blood and the Blood Bank of the Hospital also did not carry out the necessary and mandatory Compatibility Test like grouping and cross matching.

Held :
1. The National Commission upheld the Complaint and rejected all the pleas of the Opponent Doctors and the Hospital. It was observed that" it was strange that the SBD blood bank just blindly issued the blood either without compatibility test/(cross matching) or wrongly and carelessly performed it without following standard procedure.

2.  It is very unfortunate that, at the first instance only, if the blood bank would have detected patient’s blood group correctly as B -ve, the major mishap would have averted. The patient was transfused with B +ve blood, which resulted into Rh-sensitization, i.e. development of anti Rh-antibodies in the patient’s blood, which was the cause for destruction of fetus during subsequent pregnancies. Rh sensitization leads to death of fetus or development of abnormal fetus. Therefore, the SBD hospital is wholly liable for this medical negligence."

3. The Commission applied the principal of ‘res ipsa loquitur’. "Res ipsa loquitur" (Latin word which means the thing speaks for itself) is one form of circumstantial evidence that permits a reasonable person to surmise that the most Probable Cause of an accident was the defendant's negligence.The plaintiff's injury or damage must have been caused by an instrumentality or condition that was within the exclusive control of the defendant.

4. The Petitioner doctor was held responsible for damages for Rs.10,000/- only for wrong reporting of blood group. However the remaining major portion of compensation was saddled upon the SBD Hospital which was held to be entirely guilty of gross medical negligence of transfusing wrong blood to the patient, without carrying out the mandatory Compatibility Test.

5. The commission also expressed its concern about pathetic condition, rampant unethical practices and negligence in the Govt hospitals.....

Such cases are lessons to be learnt from others mistakes !!!

thanks and regards

Adv. Rohit Erande
Pune.©

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency – Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital “Its in the interest of Patients that Doctors. should not be dragged to the Court unnecessarily”” – National Commission observed while dismissing the Compliant for damages of Rs.2.5 Crores as it prevents Doctors from discharging their duty to a suffering person who needs their assistance utmost. A Physician is free to decide whom he will serve, save in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital Case : SUMAN TANEJA V/s. METRO HOSPITAL & HEART INSTITUTE & 3 ORS, decided on 02/02/2016. Factual Matrix in nutshell : 1. The Complainant, widow of deceased patient claimed damages to the tune of Rs. Two & half Crores on the ground that her husband who was diagnosed as Inferior Wall Myocardial Infarction (IWMI).did not receive the emergency treatment in Golden Hours.The Doctor refused t
Read more

A "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.-Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©

 The "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© a. Non availability of Operation Theatre is not a valid ground to hold Hospital Negligent : b. Non functioning of Machines and Equipments cannot be said to be Negligence. c. It is an incorrect assumption to say that, "since surgery was performed by a doctor, he alone would be responsible for different aspects of the treatment required and given to the patient". d. It is too much to expect from a doctor to remain on the bed side of the patient throughout his stay in the hospital. e. Every death of a patient cannot on the face of it be considered to be medical negligence. f.  In spite of the treatment, if the patient had not survived, the doctors cannot be blamed as even the doctors with the best of their abilities cannot prevent the inevitable g. The doctor cannot be held liable for medical negligence by applying the doctrine of  res ips
Read more

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section " The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (MSCDRC) in its recent judgment dated 31/03/2017, gave the verdict against the Doctor, but absolved the Hospital.. Case details - Mr.Prashant Tamhane V/s. P.D. hinduja Hospital and anr. CC No.221 of 2003. http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do… Facts in short : 1. This is the case of 2002. The wife (since deceased) of the Complainant was admitted in the Hospital after the blood reports revealed symptoms of hepatitis. There she was examined by Dr.Ashit Hegde, the Opponent no.2 Doctor in the present case. At that time he after examining the patient he thought it fit for not admitting the patient. By taking medication she was improving. 2.However after about one month, she had Chest pain and difficulty in breathing. Initial X-ray was normal, but in later X-ray, she was diagno
Read more