In the day and age of reviews and comments about services on social medias, it is not surprising to see that even healthcare fraternity is finding itself marred in controversies. The law however, does not consider such instances, as long as it is not relevant to the case.

An orthopaedic surgeon had performed total knee replacement (TKR). The patient was discharged after few days. However, the pain that existed pre-operatively returned after a month or so.

The patient was prescribed medicines and advised physiotherapy, but to no avail. Pain in her left leg persisted. She consulted several orthopaedic doctors thereafter – diagnosis of ten-degree valgus was confirmed.

The patient sued the orthopaedic surgeon and alleged that despite TKR, issues with her left knee remained untreated.

The doctor denied the allegation. Presenting his long and successful medical-practice record of performing over 3000 TKR surgeries, he pointed out that he was a capable and experienced doctor.

He also pointed out to the fact that patient’s husband wrote a positive Google review after six months; that the surgery was successful and patient was recovering well.

The Commission perused medical records and dismissed doctor’s defence, as it observed the following:

“Diagnosis in discharge summary depicts that the condition of knees was of 10-degree varus which means that besides pain, some deformity was also there. Hence, TKR was suggested by the doctor to which the patient agreed”.

“As per the medical literature placed on record by the doctor, even if patient’s left leg / knee was aligned to Valgus position electively while surgery, she should not have suffered any difficulty due to that positioning - which is not the case. She has suffered a lot and is still in pain and crippled for life, if not given the corrective surgery”.

“Also, the medical literature nowhere suggests that after TKR, deformity, as developed post-operatively in the present case, is a known or rare complication, which may occur in the patient having rheumatoid arthritis within such short span of time. There is also no recording on the file that patient ever suffered any fall or hit”.

“In Google review, patient’s husband only shared his experience about the treatment given by the doctor. He also mentioned that the doctor called his wife at clinic many times. It is contended that the patient has to visit repeatedly and her husband was appreciating doctor’s care under an impression that she will fully recover. Even otherwise, Google review given by patient’s husband does not exonerate the doctor from allegation of deficiency in service and negligence in performing TKR”.

Evidently, a positive Google review failed to impress the State Consumer Commission. The doctor was held negligent and ordered to pay compensation.

Source : Order pronounced by Chandigarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 22nd August, 2023.