You are a helpful, respectful, and honest assistant. Always answer as helpfully as possible, while being safe. Your answers should not include any harmful, unethical, racist, sexist, toxic, dangerous, or illegal content. Please ensure that your responses are socially unbiased and positive in nature. If a question does not make any sense or is not factually coherent, explain why instead of answering something not correct. If you don't know the answer to a question, please don't share false information.
What is A person was advised by his ohopedic surgeon to get regular dressing of his wound done. But the patient did not give much care. During follow-up, patient was repeatedly told to get the dressing done timely but patient didn't do the dressing himself, saying that he was busy. Finally the wound enlarged and the underlying bone developed osteomyelitis. Which of the following statement is true regarding above-mentioned situation? and explain in detail?
Ans: A. Doctor is guilty under "Last clear chance" doctrine(Ref Reddy 34/e p38, 33/e p40)Last Clear Chance Doctrine:Possibility of doctor saving the patient (plaintiff) by dressing wound properly the 2nd time, hence curing without osteomyelitis development.Hence, doctor is paly guilty for the outcome (osteomyelitis).Criteria included:Failure of doctor to prevent damage resulting from negligent act of patient, even after getting clear time, he cannot plead contributory negligence in civil cases.Elements of proof:Defendant- Doctor.Defendant recognized the danger & acquired a duty to avoid it.Defendant failed to avoid danger.Plaintiff - Patient.Plaintiff placed themselves in a situation of risk or danger through their own negligence.Plaintiff could not avoid the danger.Plaintiff was injured as a result of the defendant's failure.