After the treatment, no doctor can assure or guarantee about the life expectancy of patient : Adv. ROHiT ERANDE. ©

 “ After the treatment, no doctor can assure or guarantee about the life expectancy of patient ”

Adv. ROHiT ERANDE. ©


Case Details :

REVISION PETITION NO. 2485 OF 2018

 

(Against the Order dated 10/08/2018 in Appeal No. 1/2018 of the State Commission Manipur)

SHIJA HOSPITALS & RESEARCH INSTITUTE & ANR. V/s. KHUMANTHEM PHUNINDRO SINGH & 5 ORS.


Judgment Link :

http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=0%2F0%2FRP%2F2485%2F2018&dtofhearing=2022-07-13


BEFORE:  

  HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER

  HON'BLE MR. BINOY KUMAR,MEMBER


Dated : 13 Jul 2022

ORDER

DR. S. M. KANTIKAR, PRESIDING MEMBER

Facts in short :


1. From the medical record and evidence it revealed  that the patient, 75 yrs of age,  was a known case of renal disease under supervision of Dr. P. Guliver at Shija Hospital.  She was to undergo dialysis on 17.03.2012, however, she developed breathing difficulties and immediately shifted to ICU and she was examined by Dr. Ksh. Kala Singh (OP-2), the Professor and Head of Cardiovascular and thoracic Department of RIMS Hospital.  


2. He implanted temporary pacemaker and on the same day haemodialysis was performed.  The patient’s condition shown improvement and therefore on 20.03.2012, the temporary pacemaker was removed with her consent.  But after its removal, she became serious again and therefore, the OP-2 advised for re-implantation of permanent pacemaker after one or two days.  


3. Accordingly, the permanent pacemaker was fixed on 25.03.2012 and it was assured by OP-2 that life of pacemaker would be 10 years and the patient could survive at least two or three years.  However, the condition of patient did not improve but she developed a number of complications and after 9 days  the patient died on 04.04.2012 after implanting the permanent pacemaker.


4. The District Forum held the OP-2 Dr. Ksh. Kala Singh failed to exercise reasonable care and professional skill in carrying out implantation/insertion of pacemaker with the deceased patient.  The District Forum allowed the Complaint and directed OP-1 & 2 to pay jointly and severely Rs.5,90,000/- to the Complainants. 


5. Being aggrieved, the OP-1 & 2 filed First Appeal before the State Commission which was dismissed.  Hence, they have filed the instant Revision Petition.


HELD by the National Commission :


1. It is pertinent to note that the patient was elderly, 75 years of age, was suffering from multiple medical problems and  was admitted in Shija Hospital on for the treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD-V), complete heart block, type-II diabetes.  

2.   For CKD-V, she was regularly undergoing dialysis.  Due to cardiac problem, the OP-2 cardiologist implanted temporary pacemaker which showed improvement and therefore, it was replaced by permanent pacemaker on 25.03.2012.  

3. It was held that “It should be borne in mind that after the treatment, no doctor shall assure or guarantee about the life expectancy of patient”. Even the Complainant failed to produce evidence to prove that the pacemaker was defective.  

4. As per medical literature, pacemakers are supportive in the therapy for the conductivity of the heart.

5. The Commission reled on the landmark judgment of Apex Court in Jacob Mathew Case (2005) 6 SSC 1, wherein it has been held that :

“The subject of negligence in the context of medical profession necessarily calls for treatment   with   a   difference.   There   is   a marked tendency to look for a human actor to blame for an untoward event, a tendency that is closely linked with a desire to punish. Things   have   gone   wrong   and   therefore somebody must be found to answer for it.

……..xxx………….

The human   body   and medical science, both are too complex to be easily understood. To hold in favour of existence of   negligence, associated with the action or inaction of a medical professional, requires an in-depth understanding of the working of a professional as also the nature of the job and of errors committed by chance, which do not necessarily involve the element of culpability.”

6. It was held that the patient died due to her severe was already suffering from several fatal co-morbidities.  The patient was treated in the ICU with reasonable duty of care by the team of doctors including cardiologist and nephrologists.  We do not find any deficiency or medical negligence from the hospital and treating doctor and accordingly the compliant was dismissed.

The Commission has once again narrated important fact that “no doctor can guarantee about the result of the Treatment”. It is the duty of the Doctor to perform his/her duty to the things as per his knowledge, skill and following SOPs. 


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 ...
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