A forgotten threat: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of retained foreign objects in surgical procedures—Evidence from Indian consumer courts

Abstract Background Inadvertently leaving surgical instruments post-surgery inside the patient's cavity is called retained surgical foreign body (RFB). Except for few narrative reviews, radiological pictorial review, and multiple case reports from India, structural analysis of medicolegal cases of RFB could not be when conducting a literature review. When patients allege medical negligence in India, they can seek compensation by approaching National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. In cases of RFB reaching the NCDRC, our objective is to document the verdict of the court, types of RFB involved, specialities of doctors implicated in these cases, and surgeries commonly leading to RFB, among others. Materials and Methods This is a cross-sectional descriptive analysis. Judgments were accessed from https://www.scconline.com/. Keyword search was used, and medical negligence cases containing the keywords “mop,” “sponge,” and “gauze,” among others, where the doctor was being sued for RFB were included and analyzed. Statistical tests included chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test. Results Twenty-two judgments met the inclusion criteria. Verdict in 18 cases (81%) favored the patients. Median compensation awarded was 3.35 lakh. Gynecologists (11, 50%) and general surgeons (36%) were the most commonly implicated specialties. Nonmetallic instruments (64%) were retained more frequently than metallic items (36%). The type of foreign body did not affect either the amount of compensation awarded ( U = 26.5, critical value = 12), the duration of recovery of patient ( p = 0.2), or the time elapsed before the object was discovered. ( U = 32.5, p = 0.45). Conclusions Nonmetallic RFBs are more common than their metallic counterpart, with surgical mop being most common overall. Gynecologists were the speciality against whom maximum number of cases was filed, with cesarean section being the most common surgery, which led to RFB. The type of RFB or speciality of the doctor did not affect the amount of compensation that was awarded