€48,183 compensation for patient who lost a testicle due to ‘delay’ in ultrasound scanning in Sevilla hospital

A patient who lost a testicle due to a ‘delay’ in ultrasound scanning in a Sevilla hospital was awarded €48,183 compensation.

A patient judged to have lost a testicle due to a ‘delay’ in a Sevilla hospital carrying out an ultrasound scan was awarded compensation of €48,183 this Saturday, March 25, by the Advisory Council of Andalucia.

A claim had been filed against the Andalusian Health Service (SAS), by the parents of a male who was underage at the time of losing a testicle after being admitted to the Emergency Room of the Virgen del Rocio Hospital. The hospital was found guilty of delaying a testicular ultrasound which resulted in the 14-year-old boy eventually losing his left testicle.

In a resolution issued last January 25, seen by Europa Press, the Advisory Council addressed a patrimonial claim promoted against the SAS. It was for: “the case of a 14-year-old patient referred on September 21, 2018”. He was sent by the emergency department of Coria del Rio to the Emergency Department of the Virgen del Rocio Hospital: “for left testicular pain, the result being a testicular torsion”.

The parents of the boy – as promoters of the original claim for €65,374.89 – accused the medical facility of malpractice in the care provided to their son, who lost a testicle because he was not attended to promptly. From the moment he entered the hospital, he allegedly sat in the waiting room for five hours. It was then in the emergency room for another three hours before the orchioctemia was performed.

“Although the aforementioned delay in care is not mentioned in the reports issued by the SAS – limiting themselves to describing the care process, which on the other hand is not questioned and is considered to be in accordance with the lex artis – the true basis of the claim is overlooked”, stated the Advisory in its resolution.

It continued: That is that the said medical action was not carried out on time, in such a way that a pathology that could easily be resolved (testicular torsion) was complicated to the point of producing the worst possible result, the loss of the testicle, all because of the time that had elapsed”.

The institution added that the clinical history confirmed: “that from the time the patient was admitted to the ER at 6:48pm, until he was seen for the first time in the consultation, at 7:05pm, only 17 minutes elapsed. The urgent ultrasound was not performed though, in which case, a decrease in blood flow would have occurred, until 11:50pm, as is evident”.

“During this test, Urology on call was contacted, who performed 30 minutes of manual detorsion. When a decreased flow was observed that did not improve with manual detorsion, Anesthesia was consulted directly to transfer the patient to the operating room and perform the elective treatment there”, they continued.

“Given the non-recovery of the flow with the instillation of serum, a left orchiectomy was performed, the placement of a prosthesis in the same surgical act, and orchidopexy of the contralateral testicle, verifying its correct placement”, detailed the resolution of the Advisory.

The document also indicated that a technical report acknowledged that: “there has been a delay in performing the testicular ultrasound that would reveal the decrease in blood flow caused by the existing torsion”. This was a delay that: “led to a longer testicular ischemia time, influencing the loss of the patient’s testicle, although, both the treatment carried out and the subsequent evolution have been correct and appropriate to the usual medical practice”.

Having seen the ‘recognition of the patrimonial responsibility’ of the SAS, the Advisory stated that against the amount claimed as compensation by the family of the boy, the Administration admitted liability for: “the amount of €48,182.82”.

It alleged that “the diagnosis of the torsion and the surgery were performed in less than 24 hours, and the very serious damage does not apply, since it is applied for admission to the ICU, which did not take place”.

In view of this, the Advisory considered that: “the quantification of the damage proposed by the Administration is reasonable and proportionate to the entity of the damage”, supporting the “partial decision to uphold the pecuniary liability”, as reported by larazon.es.

___________________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. Do remember to come back and check The Euro Weekly News website for all your up-to-date local and international news stories and remember, you can also follow us on Facebook and Instagram.