|Dr. Sanjay P. Patil v. Vidhyavasini Kaluram Rajbhar (State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai F.A. No. A/14/500)
Order Pronounced On: 7.06.2018
On 14.03.2009, the patient has chest pain and approached the doctor who gave him an Injection Diclofenac Sodium in his right buttock. However, after sometime he started getting pain, tingling and numbness in right lower extremity, for which the doctor gave him some other injection.
On 17.03.2009, he again visited the doctor as he was still in pain and was unable to walk and lost the sensation of right leg. The patient consulted one Dr. Ramesh Patankar, the Neurophysician and also visited the Physiotherapist wherein he was diagnosed to have right tibial and peroneal nerve lesions with mild sensory motor neuropathy. He was then referred to Sion Hospital where the diagnosis of sciatic nerve lesion was confirmed and the treatment was advised.
DEFENCE OF THE COMPLAINANT:
- The complainant alleged that the gluteal injection was given by a compounder of the doctor and it is due to this, the patient suffered the injury
- It was also contended that the patient was working as driver at that time and due to this injury he lost his job
- The expert opinion from one Dr R. L. Singh, who opined that the intramuscular injection has caused sciatic nerve injury
DEFENCE OF THE DOCTOR:
- Three witnesses submitted there affidavits (Mr. Prem Shankar Rai, Pradeep Shrirang Lokhande and Sayeed Tanvir Ahmad) that they were present when the injection was given
- The doctor categorically denied the allegations and stated that he himself had given the injection and the patient had giddiness which he treated appropriately. Later on after observing the sensorimotor problem in the right lower extremity, he referred the patient to neurophysician of the Sion Hospital
- The doctor stated that he had followed the standard practice of giving injection and once the complication took place accidentally he took all the steps necessary to treat the complication and also submitted an expert opinion given by Dr C. S. Kambli, which mentioned that there are inherent risk factors of giving injection in patients with poor muscle mass
The State Commission further held that since the doctor has acted as per the accepted practice and also took steps for treating the accidental complication by referring him to the neurophysician for further treatment, there is no deficiency in service and medical negligence by the doctor. Hence the Forum held that there is no deficiency in service and medical negligence while giving treatment to the patient
- The District Forum held that it was because of the wrong method of administration of the gluteal injection; there was damage of the sciatic nerve on right side and hence awarded compensation of Rs. 3 lakh with the interest rate of 10% per annum to the patient
- Being aggrieved by the order of the district forum, the doctor filed an appeal before the State Commission. The State Commission opined that the injury that followed the intramuscular injection was purely accidental one and that one can get such injury even at the best hands, due to various factors discussed by the expert opinion