Do's and Dont's
- Act in accordance with the 'accepted medical practice' prevailing at that point of time.
Every medical act must be in accordance with the prevailing practice, acceptable to doctors of that specialty and in accordance with medical science, at that point of time. It is therefore necessary to keep oneself updated regularly on the newer discoveries made in medical science. Following an outdated procedure or treatment protocol could be termed as negligence.
V. P. Neelakantan & Anr. v/s Sree Chithira Thirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology & Ors. (5MLCD j38, February 2012) - Kerala State Consumer Commission
A patient was operated to fix a leak of cerebrospinal fluid and died later due to meningitis. The court did not accept the allegation that endoscopy ought to have been done, observing that a “surgery performed in 1990 cannot be examined with 2012 spectacles,” because in 1990 endoscopy was not used by doctors in such cases.
K. L. Nijhawan & Anr. v/s Sir Ganga Ram Hospital & Ors. (3MLCD j25, January 2010) - National Consumer Commission
A nine-year old girl, was hospitalised with breathlessness and was shifted to ICU within two days. Later, she was put on ventilator and died about a month later in the hospital. The court rejected the allegation that there was a delay in putting the patient on ventilator observing that 'this was not the trend of clinical practice 12 years ago when the patient was treated."
Rohini Morghode v/s Dr. A. V. Sapre & Anr. (7MLCD j313, August 2014) - National Consumer Commission
The patient met with an accident, was diagnosed with fracture of right femoral neck, surgery was performed, and SP nailing done. Post-discharge, the patient underwent 3 surgeries as the nail had shifted. The patient alleged that the SP nail technique was an outdated and old technology and the orthopedic surgeon ought to have updated his knowledge and followed one of the modern techniques. The orthopedic surgeon pointed out that SP nail operations were still performed all over the world and had not been yet declared as outdated by any medical literature and that the best method of treatment remains controversial. The court out rightly rejected this allegation observing that “the best method of treatment ... vary from one hospital to another”. The court further observed that any doctor who had not applied or followed the best possible treatment but followed the standard method with ordinary skill is not negligent.
Mr. Sanjay Mutha & Ors. v/s Dr. Jayashree Desai & Ors. (6MLCD j260, July 2013) - National Consumer Commission
The patient underwent 'Rubin Test' under general anesthesia. About half an hour after the procedure was completed, and while the patient was still on the operation table, she suffered cardiac arrest. The patient was thereafter in a permanent vegetative state. One of the allegations was that the ‘Rubin Test’ was an old practice and the gynecologist ought to have followed the ‘more contemporary procedure of Hysterosalpingography’. The court did not express any view on this allegation although the doctors and hospital were held negligent for other reasons.