Hyderabad: It is a case of medical negligence which led to the death of a 28-year-old woman. Taking cognisance of a complaint filed by the victim’s parents, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum – II (DCDRFH-II) at Hyderabad directed Yashoda Hospital and its medical administrator, and two of its doctors to pay Rs. 15 lakh for acts of negligence.
DCDRFH-II had taken up the case after Narasimha Rao and his wife Vyjanthimala approached it with a petition stating that their daughter Suchita passed away due to carelessness on the part of the doctors.
In the petition, the couple said that the deceased was suffering from neurofibromatosis since birth. She later began to suffer from dysphasia and belching for which she was being treated by another doctor who practices at a different place. When the problem aggravated, the complainants were advised to take the victim to Yashoda Hospital for treatment.
It was on 5th April, 2011 that the parents of the victim rushed her to Yashoda Hospital at Raj Bhavan Road. Here, she was treated as an outpatient. The doctor who saw her was Dr Ranganadam P who directed her to undergo tests including blood test, CT scan of neck, and upper GI endoscopy test for investigation and further treatment. On the next day, she was taken for the CT scan.
What is important is that the radiologist in the report clearly stated that the victim was suffering from displacement of the wind pipe and food pipe. Ignoring this, Dr Ranganadam recommended endoscopy. The complainants and the victim lodged their protest on grounds that this could complicate matters and adversely affect the displaced wind and food pipes, but the doctor prevailed. Soon after endoscopy, the victim fell unconscious and was on ventilator.
She got discharged on 8th April, 2011 and was admitted in a hospital in Gulbarga where she died the next day.
In their submissions, the medical administrator and doctors disputed the claim that the victim was suffering from belching. The opposite parties also said that they had consulted with the radiologist and decided that the since she was not able to swallow even small quantities of food, which could lead to malnutrition, to go for the endoscopy. The victim’s family had consented to this, they said. Utmost care was taken during endoscopy and rubbished the claim of tracheal injury. They also said that there was an improvement in the victim’s condition the next day.
DCDRFH-II President V Narasimha Rao, and members .VT R Jawahar Babu and and R S Rajasree perused the documents and heard arguments. They said that the doctors had ‘failed to anticipate adverse Pros and Consequences and they conducted the procedure of Endoscopy, without considering the physical appearance i.e. Scoliosis and Belching’, and that they had ‘failed to consider the radiology report’ before performing endoscopy.
The DCDRFH-II directed New India Assurance, with whom the doctors are insured, to process the claim and reimburse them.