ON
← Nazaj na pregled
The Hindu logo🏛️ Politika
India🏛️ PolitikaSredinapred 6 urami

Zdravnik iz Kerale v Kannurju je bil aretiran zaradi domnevne medicinske malomarnosti, bolnišnica pa obtožbe zanika.

Zdravnik v bolnišnici KIMS Sreechand v Kerali, dr. Gaurav Baber, je bila vpisana v Kannur Town policija zaradi domnevne medicinske malomarnosti. Zadeva izhaja iz pritožbe pacienta P.V. Savithri, ki je trdil, da je bila odpuščena po endoskopskem postopku, ne da bi bila ribja kost v grlu popolnoma odstranjena, kar je privedlo do vztrajnih bolečin in naknadnega operacije. Bolnica je kasneje opravila CT skeniranje v bolnišnici Kannur Medical Government College, ki je razkrila še eno ribjo kost, ki je bila kirurško odstranjena. Bolnica zanika obtožbe, ki navajajo, da je bil endoskopski postopek izveden v skladu s standardnim protokolom in da je bolnik zavrnil nadaljnji CT sken zaradi finančnih razlogov. Bolnica trdi, da je pritožba namenjena škodi svojemu ugledu in trdi, da so bili vsi postopki ustrezno dokumentirani in da so sodelovali s policijsko preiskavo.

A doctor at KIMS Sreechand Hospital in Kannur, Kerala, has been booked for alleged medical negligence after a patient claimed she was discharged without a fish bone lodged in her throat being completely removed, leading to prolonged discomfort and requiring further surgery. The case was registered by the Kannur Town police following a complaint from P.V. Savithri, a resident of Echikkovil, Pilicode, in Kasaragod district. Ms. Savithri alleged that she was admitted to the hospital after a fish bone became stuck in her throat. Doctors informed her that the bone had been removed via an endoscopic procedure and that she could be discharged. However, she continued to experience throat pain. Subsequent treatment at the Pariyaram Government Medical College Hospital (MCH) revealed that another fish bone remained lodged in her throat. This second bone was eventually surgically removed at the MCH. The police registered the case after a preliminary inquiry into the complaint submitted by Ms. Savithri to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Kannur, concerning medical negligence and the physical distress caused by the treatment. In response, the KIMS Sreechand Hospital authorities denied any wrongdoing, asserting that the incident occurred in February of this year. They stated that the patient underwent an endoscopic removal of the fish bone following an X-ray that identified a foreign body in her throat. According to the hospital, the treating gastroenterologist recommended a CT scan after the procedure, in accordance with standard medical protocols, to ensure there were no remaining foreign bodies. However, the patient reportedly refused the scan due to financial concerns and opted to leave against medical advice. She was instructed to return for follow-up after two days. Instead, she sought care at the Kannur Government MCH, where a CT scan uncovered the second fish bone, which was later removed through surgery. Hospital administrator Muhammed Nabeel confirmed that no surgical intervention was conducted at KIMS Sreechand Hospital, contradicting the initial complaint. He emphasized that only an endoscopic procedure had taken place. The hospital maintains that all medical procedures and documentation were properly recorded and that they have fully cooperated with the ongoing police investigation. The hospital claims that the complaint was made with the intent of damaging its reputation. It asserts that the police had already heard the doctor's explanation during the preliminary inquiry and that the case lacks substantial merit. The hospital has not yet commented on whether legal action will be pursued against the doctor or if further steps will be taken in response to the allegations. As the investigation continues, both the patient and the hospital remain at odds over the circumstances surrounding the treatment. The outcome of the case could have broader implications for medical accountability and patient safety standards in private healthcare facilities in Kerala. The situation underscores the importance of clear communication and adherence to established medical protocols in such cases.

Kako je poročala vsaka stran

Isti dogodek, razvrščen po političnem nagibu medijev, ki so o njem poročali.

Kako je poročala vsaka stran

Podprite neodvisne novice z zavedanjem pristranskosti in odklenite družbeni utrip, glasovanje skupnosti in svoj prilagojen pregled Zame.

Postani podpornik

Poročanje po svetu

Isti dogodek, kot so ga poročali v drugih državah.

Poročanje po svetu

Podprite neodvisne novice z zavedanjem pristranskosti in odklenite družbeni utrip, glasovanje skupnosti in svoj prilagojen pregled Zame.

Postani podpornik

Preverjanje trditev

Ključne dejanske trditve in koliko virov jih potrjuje oz. zavrača.

Preverjanje trditev

Podprite neodvisne novice z zavedanjem pristranskosti in odklenite družbeni utrip, glasovanje skupnosti in svoj prilagojen pregled Zame.

Postani podpornik

1 poročil

The Hindu logoThe HinduNeodvisenSredinaDejstva 85Objektivnost 78pred 6 urami
Zdravnik iz Kerale v Kannurju je bil aretiran zaradi domnevne medicinske malomarnosti, bolnišnica pa obtožbe zanika.

Zdravnik v bolnišnici KIMS Sreechand v Kerali, dr. Gaurav Baber, je bila vpisana v Kannur Town policija zaradi domnevne medicinske malomarnosti. Zadeva izhaja iz pritožbe pacienta P.V. Savithri, ki je trdil, da je bila odpuščena po endoskopskem postopku, ne da bi bila ribja kost v grlu popolnoma odstranjena, kar je privedlo do vztrajnih bolečin in naknadnega operacije. Bolnica je kasneje opravila CT skeniranje v bolnišnici Kannur Medical Government College, ki je razkrila še eno ribjo kost, ki je bila kirurško odstranjena. Bolnica zanika obtožbe, ki navajajo, da je bil endoskopski postopek izveden v skladu s standardnim protokolom in da je bolnik zavrnil nadaljnji CT sken zaradi finančnih razlogov. Bolnica trdi, da je pritožba namenjena škodi svojemu ugledu in trdi, da so bili vsi postopki ustrezno dokumentirani in da so sodelovali s policijsko preiskavo.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): V članku so predstavljene obtožbe bolnika o medicinski malomarnosti in zanikanje bolnišnice, ki zagotavlja uravnoteženo poročanje, ne da bi očitno favorizirala katero koli stran.

Zakaj dejstva (85): The article provides a detailed account of the incident based on the complaint from the patient and the hospital's response. It reports both sides of the story – the patient's claim of ongoing pain and the hospital's denial of negligence. While there is no primary source document, the information al

Zakaj objektivnost (78): The article presents the situation from both the patient's and the hospital's perspectives, but uses slightly more emotive language when describing the patient's experience. There is some subtle bias in the choice of words such as 'prolonged pain' and 'further surgery,' which may imply fault, though

Ohranimo novice poštene.

ObjectiveNews financirajo bralci in je brez oglasov – pristranskost vam pokažemo, ne skrijemo. Podprite neodvisno novinarstvo za 5 €/mesec.

Postani podpornik

Povezane zgodbe