Patient's Death After Surgery: The Appellate Court Explained Why the Anesthesiologist Was Acquitted

The Rivne Appellate Court reviewed the case of an anesthesiologist from the Rivne Regional Clinical Hospital, who was accused of improper performance of professional duties. Following the appellate review, the court upheld the acquittal issued by the court of first instance.

Case Summary

The medical worker was accused of improper performance of professional duties that caused severe consequences for the patient (Part 1, Article 140 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). According to the investigation, at the end of July 2020, after a thyroid gland removal surgery, the condition of one of the patients sharply deteriorated.

According to the indictment, the on-duty anesthesiologist did not provide timely emergency medical assistance and instead sent an intern doctor to the patient. The prosecution argued that the intern lacked the appropriate medical qualification to independently perform the necessary procedures, resulting in lost time, and the accused arrived at the ward and performed tracheal intubation belatedly. As a result, the patient experienced clinical death complicated by brain edema and subsequently died.

On June 6, 2023, the Rivne City Court issued an acquittal. The court of first instance concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the elements of a criminal offense in the doctor's actions. The civil claims for damages filed by the victims were dismissed at that time.

Appellate Review and Court Decision

Disagreeing with this decision, the prosecutor of the Rivne Regional Prosecutor's Office and the victims filed appeals. The prosecution insisted on overturning the acquittal, finding the doctor guilty and sentencing him to 2 years of restricted liberty, as well as demanding full satisfaction of the civil claims. This was reported by the appellate court.

During the appellate review, to fully and objectively clarify the circumstances, the court granted the prosecutor's motion and conducted a partial judicial investigation. In particular, the panel of judges re-examined the conclusion of the forensic medical examination by the Zhytomyr Regional Bureau of Forensic Medical Examination and the job description of the anesthesiologist, which the prosecution insisted on reassessing. Additionally, the appellate court re-interviewed witnesses and heard explanations from participants in the criminal proceedings.

While reviewing the case materials, the court noted that the accused holds the position of anesthesiologist-resuscitator in the Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care of the "Rivne Regional Clinical Hospital named after Yuriy Semenyuk" of the Rivne Regional Council, and according to his job description, his workplace is exclusively the intensive care unit. The prosecution did not provide any orders or protocols assigning the anesthesiologist the duty to provide postoperative supervision of the patient, who was in the Department of the Center for Laparoscopic and Minimally Invasive Surgical Interventions under the control of endoscopy and sonography named after Y. Semenyuk, i.e., in another hospital department.

Furthermore, it was established that in 2020, the regional hospital did not have an approved procedure for calling the on-duty doctor to a patient in another department, specifically, it was not defined in which cases and by what means (official phone, message through the nursing post of the department, or otherwise) medical staff should summon the on-duty doctor from another department to provide emergency medical care.

At the same time, the expert conclusion confirmed that the duty to monitor the patient's condition rested directly with her attending physician and the staff of the department where she was treated and stayed after surgery. The absence of dynamic monitoring of the patient during the postoperative period was recognized by experts as a violation of the local protocols of the medical institution.

Considering these and other circumstances, the appellate court in case No. 569/11042/22 stated that the anesthesiologist's guilt in committing the alleged criminal offense was not proven. Therefore, the panel of judges found no legal grounds to overturn the contested decision of the local court.

The verdict of the Rivne City Court dated June 6, 2023, remains unchanged, and the prosecutor's and victims' appeals were dismissed.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as our VIBER and WhatsApp pages on Facebook and Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.