Consumer Commission finds serious lapses in pre-surgery assessment and post-operative care in spine surgery case
Mohali Consumer Court Rules Against Max Hospital and Neurosurgeon
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SAS Nagar Mohali, has held Max Super Speciality Hospital and its neurosurgeon liable for medical negligence, unfair trade practice, and deficiency in service. The Commission directed the hospital and doctor to jointly pay ₹4.75 lakh as compensation to the family of a deceased patient.
Patient’s Condition Deteriorated After Surgery
The case involved a patient suffering from degenerative lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) and Listhesis at L5/S1. According to the complaint, the patient was able to perform daily activities independently before treatment in 2020.
However, after undergoing surgery at the hospital between March 19 and April 6, 2020, his condition allegedly worsened significantly. He became bedridden and ultimately passed away on January 31, 2021.
Allegations of Negligence and Unnecessary Surgery
The complainant, a 74-year-old woman, alleged that:
- The surgery was conducted without proper preoperative assessment
- Essential diagnostic tests such as X-ray, Dexa Scan, CT Scan, and MRI were not performed
- The doctor ignored the patient’s age, diabetes, and prior surgery history (2017)
- Multiple hospitalisations and procedures were done within a short span to extract money
She claimed that the hospital’s actions amounted to gross negligence and exploitation.
Hospital’s Defence: Surgery Meant to Improve Quality of Life
The hospital and its neurosurgeon denied all allegations, stating that:
- The patient was suffering from severe pain and required surgical intervention
- Surgery was intended to improve mobility and quality of life, not guarantee a cure
- Proper consent was obtained after explaining risks and benefits
- Age alone is not a disqualifying factor for surgery
They also argued that no expert medical opinion was presented by the complainant.
Commission Finds Lack of Due Diligence
After reviewing evidence and cross-examinations, the Commission found significant lapses:
- Surgery was conducted using outdated X-ray reports (over one year old)
- No fresh Dexa Scan or CT Scan was performed before the operation
- Bone condition and surgical fitness were not properly assessed
- Implants (rods and screws) were incorrectly positioned, causing complications
The Commission observed that the screws became loose and protruded within days of surgery, indicating improper surgical execution.
Key Admission by Doctor Strengthened Case
During cross-examination, the neurosurgeon admitted that:
- Factors like diabetes, hypertension, and old age could affect implant stability
- These factors were not adequately considered before surgery
- He was unsure whether a Dexa Scan was conducted
This admission played a crucial role in establishing negligence.
Condition Worse After Treatment, Notes Commission
The Commission highlighted that:
- The patient was able to walk before surgery
- Post-surgery, he became bedridden
- Multiple corrective procedures were required due to implant failure
- His condition continuously deteriorated during repeated hospital stays
The failure of implants and repeated interventions pointed toward lack of proper care and planning.
Compensation Awarded to Victim’s Family
Holding both the hospital and the doctor accountable, the Commission concluded that there was clear negligence in diagnosis, surgical decision-making, and execution.
As a result, ₹4.75 lakh compensation was awarded to the complainant for the loss and suffering caused.
