New Delhi: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has cleared a Lucknow-based hospital and its treating doctor of allegations of medical negligence during the treatment of a 75-year-old patient, overturning the earlier decision of the State Consumer Court.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to 2014, when the elderly patient was admitted for treatment of multiple chronic ailments, including diabetes, hypertension, and a history of three strokes. During his stay at the treating hospital from September 30 to October 9, 2014, the patient developed bedsores, which became the central point of the complaint filed by his legal heirs.
Allegations of Faulty Nursing
The complainants had alleged that inadequate nursing care at the hospital led to the development and worsening of bedsores. They claimed that improper treatment caused infections, necessitating further hospitalization at other facilities, ultimately contributing to the patient’s death.
Hospital’s Defense
The hospital and doctor argued that the bedsores were promptly noticed on October 6, 2014, and treated effectively with regular dressings, administration of antibiotics, and continuous monitoring. They contended that the patient’s age, prior health conditions, and critical status contributed significantly to his overall deterioration.
Patient’s Post-Discharge Actions
The NCDRC noted that after discharge on October 9, the patient chose not to return to the hospital as advised. Instead, he was admitted to Sushrat Institute of Plastic Surgery (SIPS) on October 18 for two days, left against medical advice, and later admitted to Sahara Hospital on October 20, where he passed away on November 9. The court emphasized that the hospital could not be held responsible for events occurring after discharge.
Examination of Medical Records
The NCDRC reviewed the hospital’s treatment records and nurses’ daily sheets, which showed that from October 6 onwards, bedsores were being treated appropriately, including turning the patient and administering antibiotics such as Faropenem and Linezolid. The patient’s other serious conditions, including cervical compression, chronic kidney disease, and susceptibility to infections, were noted as factors affecting recovery.
Findings of the Commission
The Commission concluded that the State Consumer Court had not properly accounted for the patient’s weak health and critical condition. The worsening of bedsores after discharge could not be attributed to the hospital or the doctor. The UP Medical Council Ethics Committee also found no negligence on the part of the treating hospital or doctor.
NCDRC Verdict
The Apex Consumer Court ultimately exonerated the hospital and doctor, observing that the State Commission’s earlier judgment was based on an incomplete assessment of the patient’s health circumstances. The decision underscored that the bedsores were being treated effectively during the hospital stay and that the patient’s post-discharge choices significantly influenced the outcome.
