The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Central Mumbai has held the Urmil Eye Hospital and Skin Cosmetic Laser Center and its doctors guilty of medical negligence which caused the Complainant to suffer loss of his thumb. They are directed to reimburse 4.67 lakh, which was the cost of the entire treatment along with 9% interest from 2015. The mental suffering of the patient was considered and compensation of Rs. 3 lakh for that and another Rs. 15000 as litigation charges were added to the payment.
The complainant came to the hospital with the primary complaint of white spots on his skin. He was diagnosed with vitiligo and treatment for the same was initiated in May 2012. The treatment plan was to inject medicines into the white spot on his skin using a syringe and then those spots were exposed to laser rays. After that, 10ml of blood was extracted from the patient’s body to conduct some medical procedures. Following this, the same blood was re-injected to the white spots using a syringe. Along with this procedure, creams and oral medications were also prescribed to the patient.
On 15th January 2013, the complainant was injured by the syringe on his right palm’s middle finger. The entire process of extracting and re-injecting the blood into his white spots on the right middle finger and thumb was conducted the same day.
The next day, the patient suffered severe pain, swelling and black spots on the right palm where he had taken the skin treatment. When this was informed to his doctor, he was advised painkillers but the injury was not assessed by the doctor in person. The condition worsened and he was referred to another hospital where he was diagnosed with gangrene in the right thumb. The patient was admitted to Hariya L.G. Rotary Hospital at Vapi in ICU. The right thumb was partially amputated and up to the first phalanx was removed because the gangrene had set in deep. This was the only way to save his right hand. The gangrene continued to spread and due to the unavailability of oxygen therapy at the hospital, he was shifted to a larger facility. Here, the rest of his right thumb and first web space of his right hand had to be removed after which he was declared out of danger by the doctors treating him. The patient also had to undergo another surgery where holes were drilled at the other four fingers of his right hand to maintain proper blood circulation.
The Complainant says that to date he is required to undergo further treatment following the amputation and he claims to experience absolute stiffness in the wrist, making his hand immovable and useless.
The patient complained that even though he had mentioned to the doctors that he suffered from diabetes, no potential risks related to his diabetic conditions were mentioned or explained to him by the doctors. He said that no necessary precautions like noting his sugar before the treatment, disinfecting the syringe and medical equipment used, or skin sterilization before injecting him were done by the doctors. On these grounds, the patient claimed that he lost his right hand due to medical negligence by the doctors and the hospital. Therefore he filed a complaint with the Consumer Court and demanded compensation for the same.
The hospital and the doctors denied these accusations of negligence and enforced that the patient lost his thumb due to long-standing diabetes, not due to any action by them. It was submitted that gangrene was a known risk factor in diabetics, which was fully explained to the patient. The hospital and doctors claimed that the disease management was explained to the patient and he showed a good response till January 2013. Further, they claimed that joint stiffness was unrelated to the PRP injections given for his condition of vitiligo.
The Commission noted that the hospital and the doctors did not produce sufficient material evidence in the form of any medical documentation or any expert report to justify the reasons stated by them in defense.
The Commission noted that the hospital and the doctors failed to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the patient’s overall health, did not counsel the patient before or after the procedure about the risks associated with his diabetic condition, and failed to adhere to the standard medical protocols of sterilization.
Holding both the hospital and the doctors jointly liable for failing in their duty of medical care and failure to take necessary precautions in a diabetic patient, the Court directed them to return the cost of treatment expenses to the patient and pay compensation for the mental agony caused to the patient in this process.
The final order by the Court stated,
"-The Opposite Parties are declared to have engaged in deficiency in service and unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
-The Opposite Parties are directed to pay the Complainant a sum of Rs.4,64,787/- (Rupees Four lakhs sixty four thousand seven hundred and eighty seven only) towards medical expenses, with an interest of 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till realization.
- The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs fifty thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical harassment.
-The Opposite Parties are directed to bear the litigation costs of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) for legal and incidental expenses.
-The Opposite Parties are directed to comply with this order within 45 days from the date of this judgment. Failure to comply with the order shall attract further interest of 18 % per annum from the date of filing the complaint till realization."
(Rehash/Dr. Shreya Dave/MSM)