Abstract

This is a case of alleged medical negligence, resulting in the loss of vision in the left eye of the complainant patient, after cataract surgery performed by the opposite party doctor. [Para 2] The State Commission vide its impugned Order dated 09.08.2017 allowed the complaint and awarded compensation with interest. [Para 3] A perusal of the impugned Order shows that the State Commission constituted an expert committee during the adjudication of the case before it. [Para 4]

Issue to be examined by the Expert committee:

1. Lack of pre-surgical medical work up and investigation.
2. Non-refund of the amount paid towards operation the second eye.
3. Immediate post operative care was non-existence and the complainant was asked to go home 1 hour after surgery.
4. Complainant was not given discharge summary or any detail of the surgery performed including details of lens implanted.
5. That the left eye of the complainant was visionless due to usage of the expired lens and or retained foreign bodies.

NCDRC observed that it is seen that all material documents were not placed before the expert committee. It is also seen that, in respect of the five issues framed by the committee for its examination, the committee, in the absence of the relevant documents, did not record any categorical conclusion, one way or the other, on any of the issues. The committee, on examination of the patient, concluded its report by stating that “it was found that patient is permanent blind from Left Eye.”

The only available documents: which is referral letter given by Rohin’s Eye Hospital to Dr. Mohan, Rajan Eye Hospital, Chennai, which show diagnosis of post-operative endophthalmitis left eye, lens used during surgery, intravitreal vancomycin given and vision was PL + PR in all quadrants of left eye were mentioned.    

NCDRC concluded that it is, therefore, appropriate that the State Commission may:

1. constitute a committee of experts in the concerned faculty/ies with the experts having qualifications equivalent to or comparable to or higher than the doctor on whose professional performance they have to opine; and
2. duly obtain the entire medical record relating to the patient and provide all relevant material documents to the committee. [Para 11]

The impugned Order dated 09.08.2017 of the State Commission was set aside by the NCDR, with following direction:

• To constitute an apt committee  
• To obtain the entire medical record relating to the patient
• Provide all relevant material documents to it, as per para 11 above,
• Then obtain its speaking report
• Adjudicate the case on merit, afresh, on facts and law. [Para 13]