~ Appropriate treatment would depend on the facts and circumstances of a given case.
• Background of the case:
~ The case concerns a patient, who during her pregnancy, was under regular observation in Hospital 1. However, after the labor pain started she was referred to Hospital 2.
~ The surgeon performed a cesarean section upon her and post-operation the patient became critical and unconscious.
~ So, they referred the patient to Hospital 3 where on the way to the hospital, unfortunately, the patient died due to Septicemia with labor pains.
• Complainant's allegation:
~ Alleging medical negligence against the doctor and hospital, the complainant submitted that the patient was referred to Hospital 3, without providing any medical attendant.
• Doctor's Defense:
~ The doctor and hospital had denied negligence during delivery and submitted that when the patient was brought to the hospital, she had a 50% effaced cervix and with a fever of 102`F.
~ The doctor diagnosed it as septicemia and the treatment was started immediately to save the patient as well as the baby.
~ During the closure of the operative wound, the patient suffered hypotension and convulsion and was revived, but again she developed hypotension, which did not improve further despite treatment.
~ For further management, the patient was referred to PGI Chandigarh in the hospital ambulance along with nurse, Ambubag with O2 and IV lines.
• The Commission held that:
~ The medical records revealed that the emergency was managed by the treating doctor as per standard reasonable practice.
~ The duty of the treating doctor is to decide the method of treatment depending upon the condition of the patients and the circumstances of each case, thus it cannot be construed as medical negligence.
~ Thus, setting aside the orders of the District and State Commission, the NCDRC dismissed the complaint and exonerated the treating doctor and the hospital.
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI