The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Palakkad recently rendered a verdict that shed light on a noteworthy case of medical malpractice that tragically resulted in a patient’s death. The lawsuit centers on claims that a patient suffered grave repercussions as a result of receiving an erroneous dosage of methotrexate (MTX), a powerful medicine used in specific medical situations. In addition to bringing attention to the grave consequences of medical errors, this episode has sparked debate over responsibility, patient safety, and the accuracy of medical records.
The family members of the dead patient filed a plea before the consumer court to start the proceedings in this matter. They claimed that the patient’s death was caused by medical malpractice and that the doctor and the private hospital in Palakkad were to blame. More specifically, they asserted that the physician had given MTX at a dosage that was higher than allowed by medical guidelines, which had serious side effects and ultimately caused the patient’s death.
The core of the issue is the disparity between the medical records, which reflect the doctor’s treatment strategy, and the accepted medical practices for delivering MTX. The family members contended that the doctor had prescribed 7.5 mg of MTX twice day, even though the recommended weekly amount of MTX is limited by medical protocol. This significant departure from accepted medical practice raises grave questions about the standard of care given to the patient.
In response to these accusations, the hospital and the doctor defended their treatment strategy and denied any misconduct. They argued that MTX and HCQ (hydroxychloroquine) were typical therapies for treating arthritic pain and that the patient had been diagnosed with seronegative rheumatoid arthritis. Nonetheless, the primary concern persisted in the purported departure from the recommended dosage of MTX, which the physician asserted was delivered in accordance with recognized pharmacological recommendations.
The material, which included witness interviews, treatment notes, and medical documents, was carefully reviewed by the consumer court after it was submitted by both sides. The disparity in the paperwork about the dosage and administration of MTX was one of the main causes of disagreement. The medical records contained irregularities and discrepancies that the court observed, raising the possibility of manipulation or fabrication to hide the actual order of events.
For example, the court emphasized differences in medical record notes on the amount and timing of MTX treatment. The integrity and correctness of the medical records that the doctor and the hospital produced were seriously questioned in light of these discrepancies as well as reports of falsified paperwork and altered treatment notes.
The consumer court reached a harsh judgment against the hospital’s and the doctor’s involvement in the incident after carefully examining the evidence. The doctor was found to have engaged in egregious negligence with regard to medical decision-making and maintaining the accuracy of medical records, according to the court. The seriousness of the problem was further increased by the intentional falsification or manipulation of medical records in order to deceive the investigators and hide shortcomings in patient care.
SOURCE:
SARKARI DOCTOR
