New Delhi: Observing that method of testing, quality of test reagents differs place to place, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), recently exonerated a Mathura based hospital, which had been sued for positive report in a HbsAg test.
When the patient underwent the test once again at Kothari Medical Centre, Kolkata, the report came negative and thereafter he approached the District Consumer Court, Mathura alleging negligence against the Mathura based hospital.
However, while considering the matter, the top consumer court noted, "In my view, the Complainant wrongly interpreted the test results. The method of testing, quality of test reagents differs place to place."
The matter goes back to 2014 when the complainant had undergone several laboratory tests including the test for Hepatitis-B (HbsAg) in Dr. Devendra Trauma and General Hospital, Mathura.
Consequently, the Pathologist, Dr Shikha Vyas had informed the patient about the report which was HbsAg positive and the patient had been further informed that it was a serious disease like AIDS and the treatment was available only in the treating hospital.
However, since the patient could not deposit Rs 20,000 as demanded by the doctor, the hospital referred him to RG Kar Medical College, Kolkata. Following this, the patient immediately started his treatment at Kothari Medical Centre, Kolkata, where he underwent the test once again and the report mentioned him to be HbsAg negative.
Therefore, being aggrieved by the wrong report issued by the Mathura based hospital, which allegedly caused the patient mental agony, he approached the District Forum, Mathura.
However, the complaint got dismissed both at the District Forum and the State Commission. Thereafter, the complainant approached the NCDRC bench raising the matter.
Also Read: Emergency Circumstances: NCDRC exonerates Surgeon, Hospital from negligence for conducting C-Section without Anesthetist
After perusing the medical record, the top consumer court noted that the at the first hospital, the HbsAg test had been performed by Hepacheck- the dipstick method. Later, at the Kothari Medical Centre, the patient underwent the test again and it was done by Q-Polychromatic Chain Reaction (Q-PCR). The HBV DNA, HBeAg was negative.
Referring to this, the top consumer court observed, "PCR is the most sensitive test for early detection of HBV status. The test turned out to be negative."
At this outset, the bench noted,
"It should be borne in mind that the initial tests were performed by Card method at Kolkata, but the blood was tested by DNA technology (PCR), which gives most accurate results. Therefore, all the quantitative analysis hepatic viral markers for Hepatitis B & E were normal. In my view, the Complainant wrongly interpreted the test results."
"The method of testing, quality of test reagents differs place to place. The card test has more chances of false positive result. The PCR/ELISA are most sensitive than card method," it further clarified.
The NCDRC bench observed that there was no medical negligence in performing the test and observed,
"In my view there was no negligence while performing the HbsAg test, it was conducted with controls as an accepted reasonable practice. Admittedly, the concurrent findings of facts being noted, thus within the meaning and scope of section 21(b), I don’t find any jurisdictional error, or a legal principle ignored, or miscarriage of justice, as may necessitate interference in the exercise of the revisional jurisdiction from this Commission."
"The instant Revision Petition is devoid of merit and it is dismissed in limine," mentioned the order.
To read the order, click on the link below:
https://.in/pdf_upload/hbs-test-no-medical-negligence-203983.pdf
Also Read: Doctor cannot be held negligent simply because patient did not favourably respond to treatment: Kerala HC junks 304A against doctors