Medical Bulletin 16/ March/ 2024

Here are the top medical news for the day:
Powered by WPeMatico
Here are the top medical news for the day:
Powered by WPeMatico
Bangalore- Indranil Sen, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Bengaluru-based Indian biopharmaceutical company Biocon, has resigned from his post effective from March 16, 2024.
Indranil obtained his Chartered Accountant qualification from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, New Delhi.
He joined Biocon 2014, after which he held various positions in the finance department. Mr Sen was appointed Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in April 2021 after Anupam Jindal stepped down from the post of CFO.
Indranil possesses more than two decades of extensive expertise in financial planning, treasury management, taxation, and financial reporting. His professional journey commenced in statutory audit, where he contributed to renowned firms such as B S R & Co. (the Indian division of KPMG) in Kolkata and S R Batliboi & Co. (the Indian branch of Ernst & Young) in Bengaluru.
Before joining Biocon, he held the position of Director of Finance at Symphony Teleca, a well-known multinational IT corporation headquartered in the United States.
Powered by WPeMatico
Drug maker Lupin said it has received approval from the US health regulator to market a generic medication to treat bacterial infections, in America.
The company has received approval from the USFDA for Doxycycline for Injection USP, the Mumbai-based drug maker said in a statement.
The company’s product is the generic equivalent of Pfizer Inc’s Vibramycin for injection, it added.
Also Read:Lupin names Rakesh Bhardwaj as Chief Information Officer
The product will be manufactured at its Nagpur facility, Lupin said.
Doxycycline for Injection USP is indicated to reduce the development of drug-resistant bacteria.
As per the IQVIA MAT January 2024 data, Doxycycline for Injection USP had estimated annual sales of USD 47 million in the US market.
Powered by WPeMatico
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently refused to set aside a summoning order against Max Super Speciality Hospital, Mohali and its Cardiologist, who were booked for allegedly implanting a cheap pacemaker which ultimately resulted in the death of the patient.
While considering the appeal by the doctor and hospital, who prayed the Court to quash the summoning order, the HC bench comprising Justice Deepak Gupta opined that apart from medical negligence, the matter is more a case of cheating.
“…this Court finds that apart from the case of gross medical negligence, it is more a case of cheating having been committed under a conspiracy by the petitioners,” observed the Court.
The bench noted that despite planning to install a biventricular triple chamber pacemaker, as per the consent given by the relatives of the patient, which was worth around Rs 4.5 lakh, the treating Cardiologist prima facie planted a cheap double chamber pacemaker costing only Rs 45,000.
The matter goes back to 2013 when the complainant’s husband after a routine check-up was advised to opt for pacemaker surgery. He approached Max Speciality Hospital, where the Cardiologist after certain diagnosis, prescribed surgery for implantation of pacemaker in the patient’s heart.
As per the complainant, the doctor advised a bivent pacemaker which cost around Rs 4.5 lakh and the estimate of the entire surgery was given as Rs 5.5 lakhs, including the cost of the pacemaker. Accordingly, the patient was admitted to the hospital.
Allegedly, the surgery was conducted after 3 days without having the actual, requisite and prescribed pacemaker available with the doctor. The treating doctor informed the complainant that the surgery could not be completed as they did not have the 3rd lead of the pacemaker. When questioned why he initiated the surgery without having the proper kit of the pacemaker, the doctor allegedly did not answer and left the patient in that condition without disclosing that he did not have the actual pacemaker.
It was alleged that the doctor implanted a wrong and cheap “Double Champer Pacemaker” against his instructions, even though the patient had paid for the superior pacemaker. Allegedly, it was done by the hospital and the doctor to make some extra money. The concerned “Double Chamber Pacemaker” allegedly cost Rs 45,000.
Further, the complainant alleged that to hide his deceitful act, the doctor claimed that he did not have the 3rd wire and would complete the surgery the next day. Meanwhile, the patient’s condition started deteriorating. Two days after the first surgery, the doctor conducted another surgery in the garb of inserting 3rd wire and this time implanted the actual pacemaker, alleged the complainant.
As per the complaint, this second surgery was conducted by the doctor not to save the patient or to complete the treatment but to replace the cheap pacemaker with the actual one, so that even if the patient died, the doctor’s act would not be revealed by the postmortem or any other way and he would be able to escape the liability.
Unable to take the burden of two back to back surgeries in just 2 days, the patient’s condition deteriorated. Two days after his discharge, his pain became severe and unbearable and even though he was brought back to the hospital, he could not survive and died in the hospital.
After the postmortem examination, the pacemaker was confiscated by the police, but neither any investigation was conducted nor any FIR was registered by the Police. Thereafter, the complainant approached the Jurisdictional Magistrate to summon and prosecute the accused.
Following this, the ld. CJM, Mohali perused the preliminary evidence and issued an order dated 8.12.2014 observing that there was a clear-cut case of medical negligence made out against the doctor and the hospital as there were sufficient grounds to believe that the hospital and doctor were guilty of medical negligence, conspiracy and cheating. Holding that they had committed offences under Section 304A, 120B, and 420 IPC, they were directed to be summoned to face trial.
Thereafter, the doctor and the hospital approached the HC bench seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 8.12.2014. They submitted that the patient had pre-existing severe heart problem i.e. severe Coronary Artery Disease and Triple Vessel Disease, for which he had already undergone bypass surgery at the age of 27 years at AIIMS.
It was further submitted that the patient and his relatives were given the option of AICD with triple chamber pacemaker. However, since the cost of the device was more, which the patient could not afford, so the second best option of biventricular pacemaker was given. Allegedly, the complainant and other relatives gave consent for the triple chamber pacemaker only on the evening of 19.09.2023.
They claimed that they decided to implant the biventricular pacemaker only after taking the consent from the complainant and the patient’s brother and informing them about the advantages/disadvantages of the procedure.
The doctor and the hospital further submitted that the procedure of implantation of the biventricular pacemaker was done in two stages- two of the three leads of the biventricular pacemaker were implanted in the first stage and the 3rd lead and the pacemaker was implanted in the 2nd stage. This was allegedly done to give adequate rest to the patient, who already had severe heart problem.
It was specifically contended that they implanted only one pacemaker i.e. biventricular pacemaker (triple chamber pacemaker), though in two stages and that they never implanted two pacemakers on the patient as is alleged by the complainant. Referring to the snapshots of the recording of the operation theatre, the doctor and the hospital contended that they impanted only two leads on the first day and the third lead and pacemaker were implanted after two days.
While considering the case, the HC bench took note of the submissions and also examined the medical records. Referring to the X-ray reports conducted after the first surgery, the bench noted, “In case the pacemaker was engrafted in the body of the patient … on 22.09.2013 as per the stand of the petitioners, it is not explained that how the X-ray conducted on 20.09.2013 is reflecting the ECPM with wires i.e. installation of the conventional pacemaker.”
The bench observed that the petitioners’ (Max Hospital) stand was contradicted even by the Hospital records. The In-Patient Record-Nursing Progress Notes after the first surgery mentioned, “Special instructions to handover staff: Patient CRT done………..”
Referring to this, the bench observed, “The above said record of the hospital would prima-facie indicate that pacemaker had been installed on 20.09.2013, as is being contended by respondent No.2-complainant. In case, pacemaker was not implanted on 20.09.2013 and rather, it was implanted on 22.09.2013 as is contended by the petitioners, how their own hospital record (Annexure P2/4) reflects that CRT was done on 20.09.2013.”
The bench noted that the stand of the doctor and the hospital claiming that double chamber pacemaker was never installed and it is only the biventricular pacemaker, which was implanted in the patient’s body, was contradicted by the bill issued by the Hospital also.
“In view of all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court finds that apart from the case of gross medical negligence, it is more a case of cheating having been committed under a conspiracy by the petitioners. Petitioner No.2 Dr. *** prima facie, despite planning to install as biventricular triple chamber pacemaker as per the consent given by the relatives of the patient, which costed roughly `4.5 lakh, instead planted a cheap double chamber pacemaker on 20.09.2013 costing only `45,000/- and when the patient developed problems or as the said pacemaker was not fitted properly, then implanted the triple chamber pacemaker on 22.09.2013,” opined the bench.
“In order to conceal the said mischief, stand is taken that only triple chamber pacemaker was implanted, but in two stages and that in the first stage, only two leads were engrafted and in the second stage, third lead and pacemaker were implanted. The said stand is prima facie found to be incorrect in view of the various documents of the hospital itself,” it further observed.
The High Court bench reiterated that the Court should not interfere with the summoning order or the order charge sheeting in a petition quashing the complaint unless there are strong reasons to hold that in the interest of justice and to avoid abuse of process of the Court, the complaint or charge framed against the accused should be quashed. Quashing should be done only in exceptional cases, opined the bench.
Therefore, dismissing the plea seeking to quash the summoning order, the bench ordered,
“…this Court finds that there is sufficient material to hold that petitioner should face the prosecution. No fault can be found with the impugned summoning order. The hospital record, as placed on record by the respondent-complainant prima facie demonstrate the sufficient material to proceed with the complaint against the petitioners, even in the absence of any opinion of the medical expert, as it has already been observed by this Court that more than a case of gross medical negligence, it is a case of cheating having been committed by the petitioners in conspiracy with each other.”
To view the order, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/punjab-haryana-hc-234371.pdf
Powered by WPeMatico
In a move aimed at addressing the grievances of the patients, an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer conducted a surprise inspection at a government health centre in Firozabad, Uttar Pradesh.
Donning a veil and posing as a patient, the officer, identified as Kriti Raj, Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of the area inspected the operations of the health facility.
For more information click on the link below:
Powered by WPeMatico
New Delhi: 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) has 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 NTA released the application forms for NEET UG 2024 on February 9, 2024.
Back then, NTA released an Information Bulletin and modified the tie-breaking policy for this year. Introducing lucky draw by computer or IT, the tie-breaking policy released by NTA mentioned that in case two or more candidates obtain equal marks, higher ranks will be given to candidates who obtain higher ranks in Biology, followed by marks in Chemistry, followed by higher marks in Physics, and lastly by draw of lots using computer.
The tie-breaking policy, which was introduced by NTA earlier this year stated- “The inter-se-merit of candidates for tie-breaking In case of two or more candidates obtain equal marks/percentile scores in the NEET (UG) – 2024, the inter-se-merit shall be determined as follows:
a. Candidate obtaining higher marks in Biology (Botany & Zoology) in the Test, followed by,
b. Candidate obtaining higher marks in Chemistry in the Test, followed by,
c. Candidate obtaining higher marks in Physics in the Test, followed by,
d. Draw of lots by using the computer or IT with no human intervention.”
This was a modification when compared to the tie-breaking policy for NEET-UG 2023 when apart from the first three criteria, a comparison of the proportion of correct responses in each of the three subjects was also considered.
Also Read: NEET 2024: Know all key Changes introduced this year
However, NMC has decided to go back to its old method of breaking a tie between the same scorers. As per the revised brochure, which has been uploaded on the NTA portal, after prioritizing the marks in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics, the proportion of incorrect and correct answers attempted in all shall be considered for breaking the tie, followed by the proportion in the individual subjects.
“In case of two or more candidates obtain equal marks/percentile scoresin the NEET (UG) – 2024, the inter-se-merit shall be determined as follows:
a. Candidate obtaining higher marks/percentile score in Biology (Botany & Zoology) in theTest, followed by,
b. Candidate obtaining higher marks/percentile score in Chemistry in the Test, followed by,
c. Candidate obtaining higher marks/percentile score in Physics in the Test, followed by,
d. Candidate with less proportion of the number of attempted incorrect answers and correct answers in all the subjects in the Test,
e. Candidate with less proportion of a number of attempted incorrect answers and correct answers in Biology (Botany & Zoology) in the Test, followed by
f. Candidate with less proportion of a number of attempted incorrect answers and correct answers in Chemistry in the Test, followed by
g. Candidate with less proportion of a number of attempted incorrect answers and correct answers in Physics in the Test, followed by”
NTA followed the same rules for breaking the tie between same scores in the case of NEET UG 2023 as well. However, up until 2021, the age of the student used to be also considered as a tie-breaker criterion after the scores secured by the candidates in individual subjects and the proportion of negative marking. Back then, the older students used to get advantages to secure higher ranks.
In fact, this age factor was taken into consideration while announcing the topper of NEET 2020 as well. Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that in 2020 two candidates who had secured full marks in the medical entrance exam were Shoyeb Aftab from Odisha and Akanksha Singh from Uttar Pradesh.
However, NTA eliminated this age factor in 2021 and the Information Bulletin 2021 mentioned that higher ranks will be given to same scorers if they obtain higher marks in Biology, followed by marks in Chemistry, followed by less proportion of a number of attempted incorrect answers and correct answers in all the subjects in the test.
Also Read: NEET-2021: Tie-breaking criteria changed, Details
Powered by WPeMatico
Pune: In a stern move, the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) has served a show cause notice to Metro Hospital, located in Wagholi, citing alleged irregularities and violations of the Nursing Home Act.
In response, Dr Mahesh Solanki, the director of Metro Hospital, acknowledged the hospital’s transition from rural to PMC jurisdiction, citing this shift as a contributing factor to the identified discrepancies, reports The Daily. “We have the nursing license and compliance as per the old local body. However, as per the recommendation of PMC, the compliance will be done by us. The same report will be submitted to the PMC,” he said.
Also Read: IMA Pune demands streamlined, spot-on license renewal process for healthcare establishments, writes to PMC
Powered by WPeMatico
Powered by WPeMatico
Powered by WPeMatico
Madhya Pradesh- Recently, the Madhya Pradesh Medical Council has invited applications from Foreign medical graduates (FMGs) for Clinical Clerkship/Internship Counselling.
Foreign medical graduates who are willing to undertake clerkship/internship in the state of Madhya Pradesh are required to fill out the online form through the link given in the notice as per schedule to be considered for internship training. Applications will be accepted only on a proportionate basis based on the total number of seats available in medical colleges in the state of Madhya Pradesh.
S.NO |
EVENT |
DURATION |
NO. Of DAYS |
1 |
Online Registration by eligible candidates of FMGE Dec 2023 on the MPMC-DME portal. (dme.mponline.gov.in) |
15-03-2024 to 25-03-2024 (up to 12:00 Midnight) |
11 Days |
2 |
Edit in Registration Form |
15-03-2024 to 25-03-2024 (up to 12:00 Midnight) |
11 Days |
3 |
Publication of Vacancies/Seats |
19-03-2024 |
2 Days |
4 |
Invitation of objection against vacancies. |
19-03-2024 to -20-03-2024 (05:00 PM) |
2 Days |
5 |
Disposal of objection and publication of final vacancies. |
21-03-2024 |
1 Day |
6 |
Publication of Merit list of registered candidates. |
26-03-2024 |
1 Day |
7 |
Choice filling and locking by registered candidates. |
27-03-2024 to 02-04-2024 (up to 12:00 Midnight) |
7 Days |
8 |
Edit in Choice Filling and Locking. |
27-03-2024 to 02-04-2024 (up to 12:00 Midnight) |
7 Days |
9 |
Allotment Result and letter of allotment issue. |
05-04-2024 |
3 Days |
10 |
Reporting at allotted Medical college in person for document verifications and admission. |
06-04-2024 to 15-04-2024 (05:00 PM) |
10 Days |
11 |
Online Resignation/Cancellation of admission at college level. |
06-04-2024 to 15-04-2024 (06:00 PM) |
10 Days |
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR MADHYA PRADESH MEDICAL COUNCIL (MPMC)
1 Foreign medical graduates who have qualify the screening test must submit an online application to the Madhya Pradesh Medical Council through the link provided. The application must be completed in all respects as well as accompanying documents stated in the application form should be uploaded.
2 Every candidate has to select all Colleges/ Institutes according to their choice in the choice-filling section. If any candidate has selected a few or limited colleges/ institutes and does not get seat allotment in those colleges/ institutes by his/ her merit, then in any circumstances he/ she will not be allotted an internship in this session. Therefore, every candidate is hereby specially informed to select all colleges/ institutes according to his/ her choice.
3 The Counselling of Internship seat allotment will be conducted only in a single and final round.
ALLOTMENT PROCESS
1 The seats will be allotted to candidates whose names appear in the merit list published by the Madhya Pradesh Medical Council.
2 As per the NMC’s circular stated in the Public Notice dated 21/09/2022, the allotment starts on “Group A permitted college” and then “Group B recognised college”.
3 Allotment of seats shall be made based on merit cum choice filled by the candidate and availability of seats.
FOR FMG CANDIDATES
1 Every candidate has to report to the allotted College/ Institutes as per the schedule mentioned.
2 The selected candidates have to join the clinical clerkship/ internship programme immediately but not later than 10 days from the date on which the final list of allotment is uploaded on the official website of Madhya Pradesh Medical Council and if the candidate is not ‘able to join the allotted medical college/institution within 10 days, the seat will be considered vacant.
3 Every candidate has to submit all the self-attested documents attached to the application form along with the provisional registration receipt to the allotted College/Institute and get them verified by the office of the Dean of the allotted college.
4 Every candidate has to upload a notarized affidavit of Undertaking which is available on the council website on Rs. 50/- stamp paper, in the online application and submit the original to the allotted College/ Institutes. (Format ‘A’).
5 As per NMC Rules, Regulations, and Circulars, the candidates who have completed their study through online mode will have to do a 1, 2, or 3-year clinical clerkship/internship accordingly.
6 The candidates who make up the Merit List will be eligible to apply for provisional registration with Madhya Pradesh Medical Council online; within 10 days from publication of such list and submit the provisional registration receipt to the allotted college.
7 The selected candidates can download the allotment letter/ receipt after the allotment of the internship from their portal login.
FOR MADHYA PRADESH MEDICAL COUNCIL
1 Madhya Pradesh Medical Council will scrutinise all the applications and shall prepare two Merit lists and the same will be published on the website of Madhya Pradesh Medical Council.
2 Merit List (ML)- 1: Candidates who are residents of Madhya Pradesh (based on Domicile Certificate).
3 Merit List (ML)- 2: Candidates who are residents of Other State.
4 The merit list will be established according to the NBE score obtained by the candidate in the Screening Test. In the event of multiple candidates achieving the same score, the following criteria will be utilised to determine merit:
A Date of birth, with preference given to the older candidate.
B Candidate who is applied on the earlier date.
5 The amount of stipend to be paid to the interns is to be decided/fixed by the appropriate authority and is solely at the discretion of the concerned authorities under which the medical college/institute is located. The Madhya Pradesh Medical Council holds no responsibility for this decision or its outcome.
6 The Madhya Pradesh Medical Council has the right to reject any application if it doesn’t meet the criteria or if the applications received exceed the number of seats available in medical colleges in Madhya Pradesh.
FOR ALLOTTED/CONCERNED MEDICAL COLLEGES
1 Original documents have to be submitted to the Dean of the allotted college/ institute by the candidate. Allotted College/ Institute will check all the original documents and eligibility along with the provisional registration receipt at the time of reporting. The college/ institute can only refuse the joining of the candidate in case any discrepancy is found in it.
2 Allotted College/ Institute will have to collect the original affidavit and provisional registration receipt from the candidate before joining.
3 After completion of CRMI, the allotted college/ institute will have to provide the internship ongoing certificate or completion certificate to the candidate.
4 The allotted college will have their login credentials, with which they need to mark the acceptance of the joining of the candidates, and shall submit a report of the joining of the students who have been granted internship allotments in their college or institution to the Registrar, Madhya Pradesh Medical Council, Bhopal, within 10 days from the date of receipt of the posting order online through the portal.
5 Allotted College/ Institute needs to verify the following documents from the candidate:
A 10th Marksheet
B 12th Marksheet
C Eligibility Certificate from NMC
D Degree of MBBS or Equivalent to MBBS
E FMGE Certificate/Screening Test Passing Certificate
F MP State Domicile Certificate
G Original Affidavit
H Provisional Registration Receipt
To view the official notice, click the link below
Powered by WPeMatico