Drug Safety Alert: IPC Flags ADR Linked To Cefuroxime, Nimesulide, Dutasteride plus Tamsulosin and some Beta-blockers

New Delhi: The Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission (IPC), through its recently issued drug safety alert, has revealed adverse drug reactions linked with the popular antibiotic Cefuroxime, fixed-dose combination drug Dutasteride plus Tamsulosin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug Nimesulide, and beta blockers such as Metoprolol, Propranolol, Atenolol.

In accordance with the drug safety alert, Cefuroxime which is an antibiotic, indicated for lower and upper respiratory tract infections, urinary tract infections (UTI), gynecological infections, and skin or soft tissue infections, etc can cause Acute Generalized Exanthematous Pustulosis (AGEP).

Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) is a rare, acute eruption characterized by the development of numerous nonfollicular sterile pustules on a background of edematous erythema.

The warning also stated that palpitations may occur from the fixed-dose combination medication Tamsulosin + Dutasteride, which is used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia. Dutasteride and tamsulosin combination is used to treat men who have symptoms of an enlarged prostate gland, which is also known as benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Benign enlargement of the prostate is a problem that can occur in men as they get older.

In addition to the aforementioned, the warning claimed that the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication nemesulide may cause fixed drug extinction (FDE). A fixed-drug eruption (FDE) is a unique cutaneous adverse drug effect in the form of recurrent lesions at the same site after re-exposure to the offending agent.

Nemesulide is used in Inflammatory conditions including joint disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic and post-operative painful conditions, fever, and acute pain in Orthopaedic, ENT, Dental, and post-operative conditions. Additional indications of nimesulide include short treatment of adult patients with inflammation and pain associated with arthritis, soft tissue, ENT condition, trauma, dental pain, Musculo skeletal and gynecology, and obstetric painful conditions. It is also used for the treatment of pyrexia and inflammatory conditions in livestock.

Furthermore, the alert cited a link between reversible erectile dysfunction and beta blockers such as metoprolol, propranolol, and atenolol.

Metoprolol is used for the treatment of essential hypertension in adults, functional heart disorders, migraine prophylaxis, cardiac arrhythmias, prevention of cardiac death and reinfarction after the acute phase of myocardial infarction, and stable symptomatic CHF. Propranolol is indicated for cardiac arrhythmias; tachycardia; hypertrophic obstructive cardiac myopathy; pheochromocytoma; thrombosis; management of angina; essential and renal hypertension; and prophylaxis of migraine. Atenolol is used for the treatment of hypertension, angina pectoris, and cardiac arrhythmias.

In line with the drug safety alert beta-blockers such as Metoprolol, Propranolol, and Atenolol can cause reversible erectile dysfunction.

This came after a preliminary analysis of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) from the Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI) database.

The analysis of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) from the PvPI database revealed the following;

S. No.

Suspected Drugs

Indications

Adverse Drug Reactions

1

Cefuroxime

Antibiotic- Indicated for lower & upper respiratory tract infection, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), gynecological infection, skin or soft tissue infection, etc.

Acute Generalized Exanthematous Pustulosis (AGEP)

2

Dutasteride + Tamsulosin

In the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Palpitation

3

Nimesulide
  • Use in Inflammatory conditions including joint disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic and post-operative painful conditions, and fever.
  • Acute pain in Orthopaedic, ENT, Dental, and Post Operative conditions.
  • Additional indication; for short treatment of adult patients with inflammation & pain associated with arthritis, soft tissue, ENT condition, trauma, dental pain, Musculo skeletal & gynecology & obstetric painful condition.
  • For the treatment of pyrexia and inflammatory conditions in livestock

Fixed Drug Eruption (FDE)

4

Beta-blockers (Metoprolol, Propranolol, Atenolol)

Metoprolol: For the treatment of essential hypertension in adults, functional heart disorders, migraine prophylaxis, cardiac arrhythmias, prevention of cardiac death and reinfarction after the acute phase of myocardial infarction, stable symptomatic CHF.

Propranolol: Cardiac arrhythmias; tachycardia; hypertrophic obstructive cardiac myopathy; pheochromocytoma; thrombosis; management of angina; essential and renal hypertension; prophylaxis of migraine.

Atenolol: For the treatment of hypertension, angina pectoris, cardiac arrhythmias

Erectile dysfunction (Reversible)

In light of the above, the Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, has advised Healthcare Professionals, Patients/Consumers to closely monitor the possibility of the above ADRs associated with the use of the above-suspected drugs.

Further, the safety alert added, “If such reaction is encountered, please report to the NCC-PvPI, IPC by filling of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions Reporting Form/Medicines Side Effect Reporting Form for Consumer (http://www.ipc.gov.in), through Android Mobile App “ADR PvPI App” and PvPIHelpline No. 1800-180-3024 (Toll Free).”

To view the official notice, click the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/drugsafetyalertsmarch2024-236152.pdf

Powered by WPeMatico

CDSCO Panel Approves J&J’s Protocol Amendment Proposal For Amivantamab, Lazertinib combination

New Delhi: The Subject Expert Committee (SEC) functional under the Central Drug Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) has approved the drug major Johnson & Johnson’s proposal for the protocol amendment of the fixed-dose combination ( FDC) anti-cancer drug Amivantamab Plus Lazertinib.

This came after the firm presented protocol amendment 4 dated 14 November 2023 protocol No.73841937NSC3003. The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of the amivantamab and lazertinib combination, compared with osimertinib, in participants with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (Exon 19 deletions [Exon 19del] or Exon 21 L858R substitution) positive, locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Amivantamab is used alone or with other drugs to treat adults with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread and has an abnormal EGFR gene. It is used in patients whose cancer has not been treated with other anticancer therapy or has gotten worse during or after platinum chemotherapy.

The synergistic mechanisms of action of amivantamab, which targets the extracellular ligand binding domain, combined with lazertinib, which targets the intracellular active site, have the potential to more potently inhibit the EGFR pathway than either agent alone.

Lazertinib is a potent, central nervous system (CNS) active, mutation-selective, third-generation TKI that targets T790M and sensitizing mutations while sparing wild-type EGFR. Preclinical studies demonstrated several potential differentiators of lazertinib over osimertinib.

At the recent SEC meeting for Oncology held on 5th March 2024, the expert panel reviewed the protocol amendment proposal presented by the drug major J&J.

After detailed deliberation, the committee recommended the approval of the protocol amendment as presented by the firm.

Also Read:Conduct bioequivalence study: CDSCO Panel Tells Emcure Pharmaceutical on Ferric Maltol Capsules

Powered by WPeMatico

CDSCO Panel Approves Roche’s Protocol Amendment Proposal For Anti-cancer Drug Atezolizumab, Lenvatinib, and Sorafenib Study

New Delhi: The Subject Expert Committee (SEC) functional under the Central Drug Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) has approved the drug major Roche’s proposal for the protocol amendment of the Clinical trial titled “A Study of Atezolizumab With Lenvatinib or Sorafenib Versus Lenvatinib or Sorafenib Alone in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Previously Treated With Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab”.

This came after the firm presented protocol amendment version 4 dated 09 November 2022 and protocol amendment version 5 dated 31 March 2023 protocol no. MO42541. This is a Phase III, open-label, multicenter, randomized, two-arm study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus either lenvatinib or sorafenib versus lenvatinib or sorafenib alone in participants with locally advanced or metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) who have progressed on prior systemic treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination.

Atezolizumab injection is used alone to help prevent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from coming back in patients whose tumor has been removed by surgery and who have received other cancer medicines (eg, platinum). It is given to patients who have stage 2 to stage 3A NSCLC and whose tumors express PD-L1.

Lenvatinib is FDA-approved for the treatment of radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), unresectable or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). It is a multiple receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that demonstrates potent antiangiogenic properties.

Sorafenib is used to treat late-stage kidney cancer (advanced renal cell carcinoma), liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma) that cannot be treated by surgery, and differentiated thyroid cancer that has come back or spread to other parts of your body. Sorafenib is an antineoplastic (cancer) agent.

At the recent SEC meeting for Oncology on 5th March 2024, the expert panel reviewed the proposal amendment version 4 dated 09 November 2022, and protocol amendment version 5 dated 31 March 2023 protocol no. MO42541 .

After detailed deliberation, the committee recommended the approval of the protocol amendment as presented by the firm.

Also Read: Biocon Biologics, CSSC collaborate for Mission 10 cents

Powered by WPeMatico

Applications Open: Assistant Professor Post At Kerala Public Service Commission, Apply Now

Kerala: The Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) has released Vacancies for Assistant Professor posts on Direct Recruitment Basis in Medical Education Department. The selection will be done based on the written exam and interview. 

KPSC is a body created by the Constitution of India. The Commission advise the Government on all matters relating to civil services referred to it under Article 320 (3) of the Constitution and publish notifications inviting applications for selection to various posts as per the requisitions of the appointing authorities, conduct written test and/or practical tests, physical efficiency test and interview, prepare ranked list based on the performance of the candidates and advise candidates for appointment strictly based on their merit and observing the rules of reservation as and when vacancies are reported. The Head Office of the Kerala Public Service Commission is situated at Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram, the State Capital.

KPSC Vacancy Details:

Total no of vacancies: 19

The Vacancies are in the department of Cardio Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, and Emergency Medicine.

Last Date of Application: 2nd May 2024.

For more details about Qualifications, Age, Pay Allowance, and much more, click on the given link:
https://medicaljob.in/jobs.php?post_type=&job_tags=kpsc&location=&job_sector=all

Method of Submitting Applications:-

a) Candidates must register as per ‘ONE TIME REGISTRATION’ with the Official Website of Kerala Public Service Commission www.keralapsc.gov.in before applying for the post. Candidates who have registered can apply by logging on to their profile using their User-ID and password. Candidates must click on the ‘Apply Now’ button of the respective posts in the Notification Link to apply for the post. The photograph uploaded should be one taken after 31.12.2014. Candidates who have created new Profile from 01.01.2024 should upload their Photograph taken within a period of 6 months. Name of the candidate and the date of photograph taken should be printed legibly at the bottom portion. The photograph once uploaded meeting all requirements shall be valid for 10 years from the date of uploading.

(b) There is no change in other instructions regarding the uploading of photographs. No application fee is required. Candidates are responsible for the correctness of the personal information and secrecy of password. Before the final submission of the application on the profile candidates must ensure correctness of the information in their profile. They must quote the User-ID for further communication with the Commission. Application submitted is provisional and cannot be deleted or altered after submission. Candidates are advised to keep a printout or soft copy of the online application for future reference. Candidates can take the print out of the application by clicking on the link `My applications’ in their profile. All correspondence with the Commission, regarding the application should be accompanied with the print out of the application.

(c) The application will be summarily rejected if noncompliance with the notification is found in due course of processing. Original Documents to prove qualification, experience, age, Community etc. have to be produced as and when called for. The profile correction made by the candidates themselves or through the office of the KPSC on request after the last date fixed for the receipt of applications will not be reflected in the application. Such corrections will come into effect only on the date on which corrections have been made.

(d) If written/OMR/Online Test is conducted as part of this selection, candidates shall submit a confirmation for writing the examination through their One Time Registration Profile. Such candidates alone can generate and download the Admission Tickets in the last 15 days till the date of Test. The applications of candidates who do not submit confirmation within the stipulated period, will be rejected absolutely. The periods regarding the submission of confirmation and the availability of Admission Tickets will be published in the Examination Calender itself. Information in this regard will be given to the candidates in their respective profiles and in the Mobile Phone Number rgistered in it.

(e) “Candidates who have AADHAAR Card should add AADHAAR as ID Proof in their profile.”

Also Read:Vacancies For Assistant Professor: Walk In Interview At RML Hospital Delhi, View All Details Here

Powered by WPeMatico

Jaslok Hospital unveils groundbreaking results in Parkinson’s disease management

Mumbai: On the eve of World Parkinson’s Day, Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre is proud to announce the unveiling of groundbreaking findings from the World’s First Comprehensive Clinical Trial aimed at slowing the progression of Parkinson’s disease. 

Led by Principal Investigator Dr Paresh Doshi, this landmark trial marks a significant milestone in Parkinson’s care, potentially revolutionizing management approaches and enhancing the quality of life for patients and caregivers worldwide.

Parkinson’s Disease (PD) affects over 10 million people globally, with a particularly high prevalence in Asia, notably in India. The disease significantly impairs motor functions and quality of life due to the degeneration of dopaminergic neurons. Current treatments focus primarily on symptom management, leaving a critical gap in altering the disease’s progression.

Also Read:8-year-old Yemeni boy undergoes rare thyroid cancer surgery at Jaslok Hospital

This pioneering trial explores the potential of transformative approaches such as dance and music therapy, along with mindfulness meditation, in managing PD symptoms and improving overall well-being. The study, conducted at Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, engaged 28 individuals diagnosed with mild to moderate PD over a duration of six months.

Methodology: After obtaining informed consent from the patient, patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated algorithm either to a therapy or a control group. The group chosen for therapy was offered either dance or music as their preferred form of therapy option. The philosophy is that people who love music may not like dance, and people who like to dance may prefer dance over music. Both groups of therapy were also given guided meditation by an expert trainer in the field of meditation. Several Parkinson’s Disease related scorings were performed to evaluate the motor function, behaviour, mood, and cognitive functions of these patients before the trial and on the completion of the trial. The control group was also evaluated in the same manner. Both groups continued their usual medical management. A patient diary was maintained to ensure adequate compliance, and patients who could not follow the required schedule were excluded from the trial.

Results:

We assessed two main areas of primary results. The first was the quality of life (measured by Parkinson’s disease Questionnaire-PDQ39), and the second was the gold standard used to determine the impact of any treatment on the progression of Parkinson’s disease (Unified Parkinson’s diseae rating scale – UPDRS). Additionally, we included two other data points to evaluate the impact of this treatment on the caregivers: PDQ-Carer change and Zarit Burden Interview Change.

All these four endpoints showed significant improvement, which was statistically significant, as seen in the below graph.

These results confirm the following:

That any therapy which the patient prefers, i.e. dance or music; along with meditation, has a definitive impact on the progress of the Parkinson’s disease and also on the quality of life of the patient. This also translates into better well-being and improved quality of life for the caretakers. Notably, the benefits observed in this trial extend beyond the intervention period, indicating the potential for long-lasting effects.

The results underscore the importance of exploring alternative therapies in managing PD comprehensively. Future directions include longer-term studies and investigations into diverse populations.

Additional key findings

Besides the above results, there was improvement seen in other areas like mood (Beck depression scale), memory function (MMSE), Balance (TUG and Berg Balance test) and Anxiety (Anxiety scale).

Commenting on this Prof. (Dr.) Paresh Doshi, Prinicipal Investigator of the trial and the Director of Neurosurgery and Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgical program at Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre says, “These results mark a significant leap forward in Parkinson’s care. Our trial demonstrates the potential of alternative therapies in not just managing symptoms, but in potentially slowing the progression of this debilitating disease. Through innovative approaches like dance and music therapy, we are paving the way for a brighter future for Parkinson’s patients and caregivers worldwide.”

Explaining about the uniqueness of this trial, Dr. Doshi highlights that:

1. This is the first trial to have a blinded randomised evaluation of patients undergoing treatment and not undergoing therapy ever presented or studied in the world.

2. This is the first-ever trial in the world that has evaluated not only Parkinson’s disease but also the caregivers’ burden in the management of Parkinson’s disease through dance and music therapy.

3. This trial laid a lot of emphasis on the quality of life, which was one of the principal trial endpoints which again has been very rarely evaluated for this form of treatment.

4. This level of detailed evaluation of motor disability, mood, behaviour, and cognition has always been performed in surgical interventional trials or medical interventional trials but never in any trials where no intervention accept therapy like dance and music were offered.

“At Jaslok, we are committed to pushing the boundaries of medical research to improve patient outcomes. This groundbreaking trial reaffirms our dedication to innovation and patient-centered care. By harnessing the power of alternative therapies, we are not just treating Parkinson’s disease, but transforming lives. Our mission is to continue leading the way in redefining standards of care and making a tangible difference in the lives of those affected by Parkinson’s.” says Dr Milind Khadke, Director Medical Services at Jaslok Hospital.

As we unveil these remarkable findings on the eve of World Parkinson’s Day, Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre reaffirms its commitment to advancing Parkinson’s care through innovative research and patient-centered approaches.

Also Read:Jaslok Hospital doctors perform Automated Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator implantation to treat rare heart disease

Powered by WPeMatico

NEET 2024 for BDS admissions: Here are Top 10 NIRF-Ranked Dental Colleges In India

New Delhi- The National Eligibility and Entrance Test for Undergraduate Courses, also known as NEET UG, is scheduled to be held on May 5, 2024, from 2:00 pm to 5:20 pm in offline mode. NEET UG is the biggest entrance exam in India so far for admission to MBBS and BDS courses.

Every year lakhs of aspiring students eagerly wait for this examination and seek admission to top-ranked dental colleges in India for BDS courses.

Here is the list of the top 10 medical colleges in India ranked by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) with cut-off percentages-

NIRF RANK

NAME OF THE INSTITUTE

STATE

1

Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences

Chennai, Tamil Nadu

2

Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal

Manipal, Karnataka

3

Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth

Pune, Maharashtra

4

Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences

Delhi, Delhi

5

A.B.Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences

Mangaluru, Karnataka

6

SRM Dental College

Chennai, Tamil Nadu

7

Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research

Chennai, Tamil Nadu

8

Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore

Mangalore, Karnataka

9

Siksha `O` Anusandhan

Bhubaneswar, Odisha

10

Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi

New Delhi, Delhi
Also Read: NEET 2024 on May 5: Here are Top 10 NIRF-ranked medical colleges

The National Testing Agency (NTA) is going to conduct the NEET UG 2024 exam across the country and in 14 cities across the world and scrapping computerized draw procedure for deciding the rank of joint scorers in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) exam, which was introduced earlier this year, the National Testing Agency (NTA) once again opted for its old policy.

The revised Information Bulletin for the NEET-UG 2024 exam, which was uploaded by NTA on its website, specified that NTA will allot ranks to joint scorers based on their performance – the proportion of incorrect and correct answers in Biology, Chemistry and Physics.

When two or more candidates secure the same score in the NEET exam, their ranks are decided in compliance with the tie-breaking policy.

Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that 24 lakh registrations have been done from all over India this year.

Also Read: NEET 2024 gets 24 Lakh Registrations: Report

Powered by WPeMatico

MUHS Invites Applications For MSc Pharmaceutical Medicine, MBA Health Care Administration, MPH courses, all admission details here

Maharashtra- The Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) has started the centralised online admission process for Master of Science in Pharmaceutical Medicine, MBA (Health Care Administration) and MPH (Master of Science in Public Health) courses conducted by the University for the academic year 2024-25.

On this, MUHS has released an information brochure detailing the Eligibility, seat intake, list of documents required and important dates of the above-mentioned courses as follows:-

IMPORTANT DATES

1

Date of availability of application form and information Brochure on MUHS website.

Schedule

First Date

Last Date

08/04/2024

20/05/2024

2

Last date for submission of Online forms.

20/05/2024

3

Last date of receipt of hard copy of Online application Forms along with self-attested Photo Copy of necessary documents to the University.

28/05/2024

4

Scrutiny of the applications.

28/05/2024 to 31/05/2024

5

Issue of Admit Card for CET.

04/06/2024

6

Date and Time of CET Test.

09/06/2024 11.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.

7

CET Result.

Information will be published from time to time on the University website.

8

Display of the provisional Merit List.

9

Submission of grievance regarding provisional merit list.

10

Display of the final merit list & first-round allotment.

11

Documents verification confirmation of Admission for the First (I) Admission Round at the respective study centre.

12

Reporting to admitted college.

15/07/2024

13

Admission Cut-Off date.

a) MBA(HCA)

b) MPH

c) Master of Science in Pharmaceutical Medicine

(20/08/24).
Also Read: MUHS notifies on Offline mop-up round at University level for PhD admissions, details

DOCUMENTS

The details of original documents to be submitted by the candidate at the time of admission along with two sets of self-attested Xerox copies are as follows:

S.NO

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

1

a) Nationality Certificate issued by District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate

or

b) Photocopy of a Valid Passport duly attested by the Head of the Department

or

c) Domicile Certificate

or

d) Birth Certificate having endorsed with nationality as Indian on it.

2

Common Entrance Test 2024 Mark sheet & online allotment letter of the respective round.

3

Passing/Degree Certificate of qualifying examination.

4

Internship Completion Certificate (If applicable).

5

Caste Certificate (If Applicable).

6

Caste Validity Certificate (If applicable) (requirement as per government regulation from time to time).

7

Income and asset certificates are to be produced by Economically Weaker Sections (EWS).

8

Non-Creamy Layer Certificate valid up to 31/03/2025 for the Categories VJ (A), NT-B, NT-C, NT-D, OBC, SEBC caste (If applicable).

9

College leaving Certificate (LC/TC).

10

Attempt Certificate of all examinations in Degree course from the Head of the Institute (If applicable).

11

Gazette for name change (If applicable).

12

Migration Certificate issued by the respective University (If applicable ).

13

Self-Educational Gap Certificate (after qualifying Degree) Affidavit by student certified by Executive Magistrate/Notary.

(If applicable).

14

Medical Fitness Certificate as per Brochure format.

15

Disability Certificate (If applicable).

16

Self-declaration form for self-attestation.

17

Undertaking regarding registration in voter list.

18

S.S.C. Certificate.

19

H.S.C. Certificate.

20

First to final year mark sheet of qualifying degree.

21

For In-service candidate NOC (No Objection Certificate) from the concerned authority.
Also Read: MUHS invites applications for Centralized Online Admissions to Fellowship, Certificate Courses 2021, View all details here

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

PROGRAM

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

DURATION

Master of Science in Pharmaceutical Medicine

a) Pharmacy Graduates.

b) All Health Science Graduates (MBBS/BDS/BAMS/BHMS/BUMS/BPTh/BPO/BOTh/BASLP/PB Sc (Nursing) / B. Sc. Nursing, B.Sc. (Paramedical Technology).

OR

Health Science Degree of any Statutory University.

c) B.Sc. (Life Sciences)- Bio-

Chemistry/Microbiology/Botany/ Zoology Chemistry/ Physiology / Pharmacology/ Biotechnology.

The candidate who has completed their Bachelor of Sciences (B.Sc.) degree from the University in which there is no provision of specialisation in the final year at the undergraduate (UG) level, but has studied at least one subject mentioned above in their curriculum at each of the I, II and III years are eligible for the course.

2 Years

M.B.A. (Health Care Administration)

M.B.A. (HCA)

All Health Science Graduates i.e.

(MBBS/BDS/BAMS/BHMS/BUMS/BPTh/

BPO/BOTh/BASLP/PBBSc (Nursing)/

B.Sc. Nursing) B.Sc. (Paramedical Technology).

OR

Health Science Degree of any Statutory University.

2 Years (Semester Pattern).

M.P.H. (Master of Science in Public Health)

All Health Science Graduates i.e.

(MBBS/BDS/BAMS/BHMS/BUMS/BPTh/

BPO/BOTh/BASLP/PBBSc (Nursing)/

B.Sc. Nursing) B.Sc. (Paramedical Technology).

OR

Health Science Degree of any Statutory University.

2

Years (Yearly Pattern)
Also Read: MUHS Further Extends Application Deadline For MBA Healthcare Administration, MSc Pharmaceutical Medicine, MPH Nutrition

SEAT INTAKE

The total vacant seats in the above three courses across the three institutes are 150.

COURSE NAME

Master of Science in Pharmaceutical Medicine

M.B.A. (Health Care Administration)

M.P.H. (Master in Public Health)

LOCATION

Department of PharmaceuticlMedicine, MUHS, Nashik.

School of Health Care Administration,3rd floor, District Hospital, Aundh, Pune.

Department of Public Health, 3rd floor, District Hospital, Aundh, Pune.

INTAKE

60

60

30

To view the information Brochure, click the link below

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/pg-information-brouchure-2024-25-235901.pdf

Powered by WPeMatico

Chhattisgarh HC takes suo moto cognizance of closure of Thyroid testing at Bilaspur District Hospital

Raipur: Taking cognizance of the closure of thyroid testing services at the District Hospital in Bilaspur, the Chhattisgarh High Court recently directed the Additional Chief Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department of Chhattisgarh to submit a personal affidavit detailing the existing facilities at the hospital.  

The Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Rajani Dubey, has taken suo moto cognizance of the issue through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). 

This issue was taken to court after the crucial thyroid testing service at the hospital remained unutilised for the past three months. The suspension of the facility due to a shortage of reagents has adversely affected patients, particularly pregnant women and those relying on the hospital’s Outpatient Department (OPD) and inpatient services. 

Also Read- Telangana High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Rotten Dead Bodies At Gandhi Hospital Morgue

Despite several appeals being made to the Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation regarding the issue the hospital management received no improvement in their action. The corporation failed to take action to address the reagent shortage. 

This has compelled patients to seek testing services from private labs, resulting in financial burdens. The lack of a pathologist at the Hamar Lab within Bilha Matru Shishu Hospital has further compounded the problem, forcing patients to turn to private labs for various tests.

The matter of the renewal of reagents for the hormonal testing machine at the District Hospital was neglected until the court intervened and made the Chief Secretary, Director (health services), CMHO Bilaspur, Divisional Commissioner and District Collector respondents in the matter.

As per the TOI news report, the critical circumstances have resulted in an astonishing influx of patients, averaging between 60 to 70 individuals per day, who are seeking medical aid at the maternal and child hospital located within the District Hospital premises. Within the last three months, a total of 4263 patients have opted for private laboratories to undergo essential diagnostic tests.

Taking note of the matter, the court directed the government to provide a personal affidavit detailing the existing facilities at the hospital and scheduled the next hearing on April 22. 

Also Read: Formulate SOP for medical termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks: Bombay HC tells Maha Govt

Powered by WPeMatico

Delay in Cancer Diagnosis: NCDRC upholds compensation order against doctor for medical negligence

New Delhi: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) recently held an Andhra Pradesh-based doctor guilty of medical negligence for the delay in cancer diagnosis of a patient who was suffering from breast pain.

“…the continuous therapy and reluctance to even record the advice for further diagnostic investigations to find out the nature and prognosis of the lesions already noted in the Mammography Report would certainly suggest clear negligence on the part of the Petitioner as the Consulting Physician/ Family Doctor of the Complainant, since the lump originally seen at the earlier stage in the investigations had grown very rapidly till the surgery was performed four months later,” noted the Apex Consumer Court, upholding the Rs 6 lakh compensation slapped on the doctor by the District Commission.

The history of the case goes back to 2011 when the patient consulted the doctor as she was suffering from pain in her right breast. The doctor, after clinical examination, prescribed medicines and advised her to undergo a pathological test for diagnosis. Accordingly, the patient underwent a mammography test.

Meanwhile, despite the subsequent medication, the pain persisted and the doctor recommended surgery to remove the lump in the right breast. Consequently, on 11.05.2011, the patient underwent surgery for the removal of the lump and a piece of it was sent for biopsy to a Diagnostic Centre in Rajahmundry. 

Post-surgery, the patient followed the instructions for care given by the treating doctor. However, since there was still no relief from the pain, she sought further consultation at G.S.L Cancer Hospital, as per the treating doctor’s referral.

The biopsy report revealed infiltrative duct cell carcinoma, with the tumor deemed inoperable due to its growth. Subsequently, at NIMS Hospital, Hyderabad, her right breast was surgically removed. Allegedly, it was only post-surgery, upon consultation with doctors at NIMS Hospital and GSL Hospital, that the patient realized the alleged improper treatment by the treating doctor.

It was claimed by the petitioner that the issue of cancer was initially indicated in the report dated 27.01.2011 indicating negligence by the treating doctor. Subsequent treatments included weekly chemotherapy at NIMS Hospital and radiotherapy at GSL Cancer Hospital, Rajahmundry, resulting in side effects such as hair loss and loss of appetite, impacting her ability to care for her family.

Since the doctor did not agree to pay the damages, the patient approached the District Consumer Court and filed a complaint. While considering the matter, the District Commission in 2015 directed the doctor to pay the complainant Rs 5 lakh towards compensation, Rs 1 lakh towards mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs.

The order of the District Commission was challenged before the State Commission, Andhra Pradesh, which upheld the order of the District Forum. Challenging this, the doctor approached the Apex Consumer Court.

Approaching the NCDRC, the counsel for the treating doctor claimed that the lower Fora erred in allowing the complaint without duly considering the impeccable track record of the treating doctor spanning four decades of medical practice. Further, it was contended that negligence was wrongly attributed to the treating doctor without considering the comprehensive evidence, including that of an Oncology Surgeon.

It was also claimed by the doctor’s counsel that due to the complainant’s young age and her relatively small size of lump according to the Mammogram and Ultrasound, diagnosing cancer was challenging. It was also submitted that the treatment provided by the treating doctor was 2.5 years before the complainant’s death, with the cause of death remaining undisclosed.

Apart from this, the doctor’s counsel also argued that the absence of an explanation for the 2-month gap between the Complainant’s discharge from the petitioner’s hospital and the subsequent surgery suggested a potential exacerbation of the disease during this period.

On the other hand, the counsel for the complainants argued that there was a delay in the correct diagnosis and administration of treatment by the treating doctor from 10.01.2011 to 26.05.2011. This delay adversely affected the outcome of the treatment, particularly considering the young age of the patient and the aggressive nature of the disease with poor diagnosis/biological factors.

The complainants also submitted evidence by an expert doctor, who emphasized the negative impact of the treatment delays. The counsel for the complainants submitted that the doctor’s admission during evidence undermined her own defence since she admitted to not recording suspicions about the mass in the medical records and the prescribed antibiotics and anti-inflammatory drugs initially, followed by iron tablets after blood investigations.

Therefore, it was argued that the failure to prescribe further diagnostic tests such as MRI, CT Scan, and FNAC, coupled with the absence of estrogen testing before surgery, were instances of negligence. It was contended that the absence of a biopsy and FNAC recommendation, along with reliance solely on a normal mammogram, was deemed inadequate for ruling out breast cancer.

While considering the matter, the top consumer court took note of the orders passed by both the District and State Commission and observed,

“Both of them have come to the conclusion that there was negligence/ deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner/Opposite Party who did not advise appropriate investigations in time, which resulted in a fast progression in the disease of Breast Cancer for which the deceased Complainant had actually been suffering. In fact, the Ld. State Commission in its Order has noted that when the pain and affliction being suffered by the deceased Complainant persisted in spite of the conservative treatment prescribed by the Petitioner, no investigations were advised on no less than 5 different occasions between 10.1.2011 to 24.3.2011.”

“The defence raised in her Written Version that she had orally advised such investigations, but the Complainant herself was reluctant to undergo the same, cannot be regarded as a credible excuse for not writing the advice or not recording the oral advise and reluctance of the Complainant as claimed in the relevant Prescription slips. Furthermore, even in the Mammography and SonoMammography Report dated 27.1.2011 (Annexure-P1), it was noted that the “…Right Breast shows two small irregularly oval hypoechoic lesions….., multiple internal echoes….” and the final impression was “SMALL EVOLVING ABSCESSES- RIGHT BREAST”. About 4 months later on 26.5.2011 ultimately the Biopsy Report of the Right Breast Lump established Cancer,” noted the Apex consumer court.

Holding that the treating doctor was negligence, the NCDRC bench noted,

“In the given facts and circumstances, the continuous therapy and reluctance to even record the advice for further diagnostic investigations to find out the nature and prognosis of the lesions already noted in the Mammography Report would certainly suggest clear negligence on the part of the Petitioner as the Consulting Physician/ Family Doctor of the Complainant, since the lump originally seen at the earlier stage in the investigations had grown very rapidly till the surgery was performed four months later.”

Clarifying that NCDRC cannot go into re-appreciation of evidence, the consumer court upheld the order passed by the District and State Commission. “Consequently, this Commission finds no grounds whatsoever to interfere with the concurrent decisions of both the Ld. Fora below. The Revision Petition is therefore dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs,” it noted.

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/ncdrc-rs-6-lakh-compensation–236102.pdf

Also Read: NCDRC Grants Rs 9.77 Crore Relief to Surgeons, says MBBS doctors can perform Hair Transplant Procedures:

Powered by WPeMatico

Subcutaneous infusion of levodopa-carbidopa beneficial for Parkinson’s disease

Subcutaneous infusion of ND0612 (a levodopa-carbidopa solution) increases on time without troublesome dyskinesia among patients with Parkinson disease, according to a study published online March 15 in The Lancet Neurology.

Powered by WPeMatico