Ridge Hospital, GHS, and MoH Hit with GHS 3 Million Fine Following Patient’s Death

An Accra High Court has awarded damages of GH¢3million to one Mohammed Mustapha against the Greater Accra Regional (Ridge Hospital), the Ministry of Health, the Health Ministry and the Attorney-General over the death of his wife.

The case of Mohammed Mustapha v Attorney-General, Ministry of Health & 2 Ors. (Suit No. GJ/1043/2020) is for negligence which allegedly caused the death of the pregnant wife of Mr. Mustapha after she delivered her child through the surgical procedure of Caesarian Section (CS).

The Plaintiff in the matter who began his action in 2020, roughly a year after the death of his wife on or before July 2019 claimed damages arising from the death of his wife to the tune of GH¢5million cedis.

The Court in a judgement delivered on July 31, 2024 upheld the claims of the Plaintiff but awarded more than half of the quantum of damages claimed arising from negligent conduct of the Greater Accra Regional Hospital located at Ridge.

Events of negligence leading to death

Per the writ of the Plaintiff, Mohammed Mustapha, and the submission filed on his behalf by the learned Yaw Twumasi Ankrah, the wife of the Plaintiff, Akua Nyarko Osei-Bonsu (now deceased), was a patient of Ridge hospital in or about July 2019 when she was about twelve (12) months pregnant till her untimely death.

Plaintiff’s wife regularly visited the Ridge hospital for antenatal care and other medical examinations necessary for the wellbeing of both the deceased and her baby.

The writ of the Plaintiff further stated that, in or about November 2019, 4th Defendant (Ridge Hospital) requested that his deceased wife undertake a Doppler Scan.

When the result of the scan was submitted in or about December 2019, Plaintiff’s deceased wife was diagnosed of severe Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR) with an Abnormal Umbilical Artery Doppler, a condition which pointed to placental insufficiency.

“Plaintiff’s deceased wife was scheduled for an emergency Caesarean Section (CS) based on her diagnosis in order to save the life of the deceased and the baby which said Caesarean Section (CS) was conducted on 16th December 2019.

Plaintiff says that he was asked to pay for a Caesarean Section (CS) pack from the pharmacy of the 4 th Defendant Hospital for the surgery which he did. The CS pack contained drugs needed for the Caesarean Section (CS) and treatment after the surgery. After the Caesarean Section (CS) Plaintiff’s wife developed a condition called thromboembolism which led to her death. The baby also did not survive.

Plaintiff’s case is that his wife’s development of thromboembolism and eventual death was occasioned by the negligence of the 4th Defendant Hospital and its officers. The standard protocol of the 4th Defendant hospital which requires that a pre-operation and a post-operation plan for surgeries be developed and followed was not complied with by the 4th Defendant.

The 4th Defendant was required to develop a pre-operation and post-operation management plan as part of standard protocols before conducting the operation on the deceased. This plan should detail all necessary steps, activities, and medications for the patient before and after the surgery.

Although the Plaintiff procured an anticoagulant for the surgery, the 4th Defendant failed to administer it to the deceased. The standard practice of the 4th Defendant mandates the administration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy 12 hours after a Caesarean Section (CS), which was not included or followed in the deceased’s management plan.

The 4th Defendant did not fulfil its duty of care by ensuring all pre-operative and post-operative activities were properly recorded in the management plan. Despite the protocols requiring the administration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy post-CS, the therapy was not given to the deceased.

ALSO READ: Ghanasco Student Arrested for Alleged Shooting of Classmate

This omission occurred despite the 4th Defendant’s awareness of the deceased’s susceptibility to pulmonary thromboembolism due to her weight, condition, and the surgery. The failure to adhere to these protocols and administer the necessary therapy directly contributed to the death of the deceased.

Plaintiff further says that, since his wife was assessed to be at a high risk of developing pulmonary embolism, the 4th Defendant Hospital should have taken all steps to ensure that she did not develop embolism.

Not only did Plaintiff pay for Fragmin, the anticoagulant needed to prevent embolism but there were also lots of anticoagulants in stock at 4th Defendant’s pharmacy which is a drug covered by the National Health Insurance Scheme.

Plaintiff further says that apart from administering an anticoagulant, there are other methods of preventing embolism after child birth such as the use of stockings and early mobilization to aid blood flow. 4th Defendant however failed to take any of the known steps that could have easily avoided the unfortunate death of the Plaintiff’s wife.

Plaintiff’s case is that 4th Defendant’s staff watched on without reasonable care for Plaintiff’s wife to develop pulmonary embolism before administering an anticoagulant at a time when it was too late to save the life of Plaintiff’s wife.

The Plaintiff claims that the negligence of the Defendants resulted in the loss of his wife, affecting a marriage of less than four years. Plaintiff’s case is that the treatment received fell short of the reasonable level of care expected from a hospital and further breached the National Health Policy and Ghana’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals on maternal health and mortality.”

Subscribe to this blog and follow us on facebook