On November 28, 2015, a fourteen-year-old teenager, Antonio, died at his home. A few hours earlier, the child had been admitted to the emergency room of the Epicura hospital in Hornu. As symptoms, he had chills and fever.
An emergency doctor, under the advice of a pediatrician contacted by telephone, sent the boy home. The diagnosis was an onset of flu for which an aspirin and an anxiolytic were administered to the child.
But Antonio wasn’t just suffering from the flu. He had been suffering from an autoimmune disease, Opsi Syndrome, since he had his spleen removed at the age of five.
The teenager’s health deteriorated rapidly and he died in his parents’ arms. Convinced that the hospital and two doctors had committed a fault, the parents became civil parties,
College of Experts
On Monday, during the first hearing devoted to this case, the Mons criminal court heard a panel of experts, made up of doctors.
On Saturday, November 28, 2015, a doctor specializing in vascular surgery was on duty in the emergency room. He did not realize the risk of infection, despite the chills, signs of infection, which Antonio complained of.
According to the college of experts, “This infectious risk should have challenged the emergency doctor, regardless of his specialization”. Furthermorethe doctor had the possibility of consulting the medical literature on various supports, in particular on Internet.
The medical record
That day, the emergency doctor was content to seek advice from the pediatrician on duty, by telephone. He didn’t know there was a file in Antonio’s name, mentioning his background.
“It is not surprising that this doctor had never seen this child. However, he had access to the medical file in his computer”, says an expert. His colleague adds:It was absolutely necessary to draw up a general picture of the patient, with his history”. The emergency doctor, warned of an involuntary homicide by lack of foresight, replies that he did not have access to the elements relating to the episode of 2010, when the young man had been treated with an antibiotic. intravenously. “The child had to be treated in another hospital”, he said. However, an expert mentions that this element is in the file and comes … from Epicura.
For the experts, an emergency doctor must read the medical file and listen to the parents to provide the necessary care to the patient. However, the latter demanded an antibiotic. The deceased’s parents indicate that they informed the doctor of their son’s history and of a pneumococcal vaccination. This element would not have been taken into account.
Two discomforts
Antonio suffered two illnesses, one in radiology and the other in the waiting room. They are not mentioned in the file. Experts learned this from auditions conducted later in the ER…
Finally, the only reading of the parameters appearing in the file concerns only the temperature measurements. There is nothing else. This point also surprises the experts, who have highlighted some errors.
Oral arguments will take place on December 5.
