Recording crucial and material details helps doctor win ‘misnomer’ of a case

  • Posted on: October 18, 2019

The patient had complain of kidney stones and was taken to Dr. Sidhu who performed ureteroscopic procedure to remove the stones and placed a DJ stent. About six months later, patient approached the doctor again with complain of chest infection. The doctor prescribed medicines but she patient did not get the desired result and hence took treatment from other doctors and hospitals.

The patient was eventually diagnosed with lung cancer and died about a year later.

Oddly enough, the patient’s husband sued the doctor and alleged that DJ stent placed in patient’s kidney caused the onset of cancer! He presented ultrasonography report from one of the laboratories that reported ‘Ctow pipe’ in patient’s stomach to bolster his claim.

The Commission perhaps was amused by such claims as it observed that the word ‘Ctow’ mentioned in the ultrasonography report was a ‘misnomer’ and it should have been ‘in situ’. The Commission also perused the medical reports of the hospital where patient was treated during her final days and observed that she was diagnosed with lung cancer and had undergone chemotherapy sessions for same.

But the deciding factor in the case was the fact that Dr. Sidhu had mentioned all crucial facts of ureteroscopic procedure, including inserting a DJ stent in patient’s kidney and she was advised for follow-up visit to remove the same, but never turned up.

The Commission ruled that the allegations had no legs and the doctor followed due diligence.

Source: Order pronounced by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi on 14th June, 2019