The lawyer representing a consultant anaesthesiologist accused of criminal negligence that contributed to the death of a Bahraini from weight-loss surgery complications presented a four-point defence in favour of his client.
The Arab defendant, along with a leading Saudi surgeon, had earlier been charged with criminal negligence and committing a fatal medical error.
In June, Hussain Abdulhadi died of blood poisoning, eight days after undergoing a bariatric procedure known as sleeve gastrectomy at a private healthcare facility.
An inquest conducted by the National Health Regulatory Authority (NHRA) held two medics responsible for the death of the 29-year-old Bahraini man.
Its report stated that a ventilator was removed from the patient in the ICU, even though he could not breathe. It also implicated the surgeon in the death.
In the trial’s fifth hearing yesterday, the consultant anaesthesiologist’s lawyer proclaimed his client’s innocence of all charges.
He presented a memorandum to the judge outlining his defence points along with medical reports as supporting evidence.
“The accusation that my client failed to monitor the victim properly while in the ICU has no basis in reality,” the lawyer claimed. “First of all, my client’s contract with the hospital lists him as an anaesthesiologist, not an ICU doctor, and his NHRA licence only permits him to practice anaesthesiology.
“On the day of the surgery, the consultant anaesthesiologist put the patient under, and monitored his condition for the entirety of the six-hour-long operation.
“After the operation was over, he only handed the patient over to the ICU after he had made sure that he was in a stable condition and stayed with him in the ICU for a whole hour.
“Before he left, he made sure that all of the patient’s readings and vitals were well and, only then, did he remove the intubation device.
“Not only that, he called the head of anaesthesiology and hospital president before leaving to make sure someone took over watching the patient.”
The lawyer then claimed that the consultant anaesthesiologist was not responsible for following up with the patient after his duty during the operation was over, and blamed the co-defendant surgeon for allegedly neglecting his duty.
He went on to describe in detail the post-operation timeline and asked the judge to allow defence witnesses to be heard.
In an earlier hearing, prosecutors highlighted the testimony of a veteran doctor who claimed that both medics in the dock were not quick enough in performing tests and monitoring the patient’s condition.
“The anaesthesiologist removed the ventilator from the patient while in the ICU, knowing that he was having breathing difficulties and was dependent on intubation,” the veteran medic alleged.
“The patient was suffering from septic shock and his organs were failing, however, the anaesthesiologist did not provide the necessary care, ultimately leading to his death.”
The GDN earlier reported that NHRA’s Medical Errors Committee had ‘established a clear connection’ between Mr Abdulhadi’s death and alleged medical errors.
A Public Prosecution representative asked judges to adjourn the trial to a verdict date, and renewed his request to hand down the maximum possible sentence to the two defendants.
The lawyer of the patient’s family also appeared at the Lower Criminal Court to submit her statement of claim against the defendants, having earlier been given permission to take legal action against the accused in the Civil Court.
The Saudi surgeon’s lawyer asked that the judge strike down the civil suit and allow both defence and prosecution witnesses to be heard.
The judge adjourned the trial to October 10, where a doctor who led the NHRA’s report will be called to testify.
zainab@gdnmedia.bh
&uuid=(email))