Hematoma a Known Medical Complication, Not Negligence: SCDRC
Bhopal: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC), Madhya Pradesh, has upheld the dismissal of a complaint against a Gwalior-based hospital and its treating doctor, ruling that the development of a hematoma after angiography does not by itself amount to medical negligence.
Background of the Case
The matter dates back to June 2013, when the complainant, suffering from chest pain, was admitted to the Gwalior hospital and advised to undergo angiography on June 19, 2013. The procedure was conducted through the femoral artery to assess the extent of blockage in the heart arteries.
Allegations by the Patient
According to the complainant, a few hours after the angiography, he developed pain and swelling in his thigh, which later turned into an infected hematoma. He alleged that despite being discharged on June 27, 2013, his condition did not improve, forcing him to seek further treatment at Medanta Hospital, where he claimed to have incurred expenses of over ₹4 lakh.
Claim of Medical Negligence
The patient further contended that the angiography was performed negligently, leading to the hematoma and causing a delay in undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery. On these grounds, he approached the District Consumer Court, alleging deficiency in service against the hospital and the doctor.
Defense by Hospital and Doctor
The treating doctor and hospital denied all allegations, stating that the complainant had been suffering from chest pain for nearly ten years. Angiography was advised to evaluate the blockages, which revealed obstructions in all three major heart arteries, prompting a recommendation for CABG. However, they submitted that the patient did not consent to the surgery at that time and was discharged on request.
District Commission’s Decision
After considering the evidence, the District Consumer Court dismissed the complaint, concluding that the complainant failed to establish any deficiency in service or negligence in the performance of angiography by the hospital or doctor.
Appeal Before State Commission
Aggrieved by this decision, the complainant filed an appeal before the SCDRC, arguing that the District Commission failed to properly examine the issue of hematoma and its alleged link to negligent angiography, which, according to him, delayed the CABG procedure.
SCDRC’s Final Ruling
Dismissing the appeal, the State Consumer Commission observed that a hematoma is a known complication of angiography and its occurrence cannot automatically be treated as negligence. The Commission noted that there was no evidence to prove improper performance of the procedure and affirmed that the District Commission’s order was legally sound, thereby rejecting the complainant’s appeal.
