Bridgit Dimond

Protecting the consumer: A recent legal case regarding product defects should ring warning bells for all health care workers. Bridgit Dimond explains

There was a recent report of a patient who was awarded damages under the Consumer Protection Act of 1987 when surgical scissors broke and a piece became embedded in his knee during surgery. A second operation was required for removal. All that the patient had to prove to sue the manufacturer under this Act was that the product was defective and the defendant was the producer or supplier of the product. Possible defenses in such cases would be 1) denying that the product was defective 2) maintaining that the state of knowledge at the time the product was made was not such that the producer could have been expected to discover the defect 3) that the manufacturers instructions were not followed or 4) that the product was changed by the users after purchase. If a hospital were unable to name a supplier of equipment then the hospital would become the de facto supplier. Therefore full records must be kept of the sources and dates of supplies. Another important consideration is following manufacturers instructions. For example if a manufacturer specifies that a product is sold for a single use yet the hospital deems that the product can be safely autoclaved for reuse then the hospital has altered the manufacturers instructions and would be liable for any damages under this Act.