The patient was taken to a government hospital for delivery. She was anaemic and hence, required blood transfusion. Unfortunately, wrong blood group was transfused. The foetus died and the patient also suffered severe complications. She was taken to a higher centre, where she recovered after few days.
The principal doctor and hospital were sued; the hospital accepted its mistake.
An enquiry committee was formed, its findings were taken into consideration by the top Consumer Court before making a ruling.
Lab Technician: She issued the blood bag without cross-checking for requisite important details of patient and more particularly the blood group, and later on concealing the facts and tampering with the sample.
Intern: She initiated the transfusion without checking and re-checking the requisite details of patient with the details given on the blood bag and started the transfusion on the presumption that the blood bag lying beside the patient is meant for her, violating every fundamental blood transfusion protocol. Moreover, she failed to inform her seniors regarding the transfusion and showing gross carelessness and insensitivity failed to monitor the patient.
House Surgeon: The role played by the House Surgeon, is also not a small one. She was wholly responsible for the transfusion in the labour room, failed to check for the required details in the blood bag with that of the patient’s case sheet as soon as the blood bag was brought and kept on the table by the nursing student. Without even checking for the details on the blood bag she simply passed on responsibility of the transfusion to her amateur / new junior colleague. Moreover, she did not follow up with the patient and failed to monitor her.
Citing the above report, the Commission observed that the doctor and intern were under supervision of seniors. Therefore, their role was very limited. The Commission further observed that the actual procedures and transfusion was duty of the nursing staff who should be more vigilant.
The hospital was held vicariously negligent, and ordered to pay compensation.
Source : Order pronounced by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 23rd May, 2023.