Gauteng Health rejects DA claim that surgery delay at Steve Biko left patient blind

The Gauteng Department of Health has rejected Democratic Alliance claims that a delay in repairs to equipment at Steve Biko Academic Hospital (SBAH) Eye Clinic left a patient permanently blind in his right eye.

Conflicting accounts from DA and Gauteng Health

The DA issued a media statement on 3 August saying a patient had waited six months for sight-saving retinal surgery after the clinic suspended retinal procedures because of a faulty compressor and suction systems needed to operate a constellation machine. DA Gauteng health spokesperson Madeleine Hicklin told the party’s account of the case and said specialists were frustrated by procurement delays.

In response on 4 August, the Gauteng Department of Health described the DA’s assertions as “factually flawed” and said the clinical record did not support the claim that infrastructure challenges at the hospital had contributed significantly to the patient’s permanent blindness.

What the DA said

The DA said the patient had been living with a detached retina in his right eye since February and that despite repeated consultations at Steve Biko and Mamelodi Eye Clinics he did not receive the urgent surgery he required. The DA said a procedure was recently performed at Mamelodi Eye Clinic to try to save the patient’s left eye and that he had been referred to Steve Biko.

Hicklin said the party was calling on the Gauteng MEC for Health and the Head of Department to intervene to ensure procurement of the required equipment and the restoration of retinal surgery services. The DA also said specialists had reportedly raised R10,000 to buy a replacement compressor but that hospital management rejected the offer because procurement must follow the Gauteng Department of Health’s supply chain processes.

Department response and clinical explanation

Department spokesperson Steve Mabona said the patient had experienced medical challenges arising from multiple previous surgical procedures. He said specialists at another hospital within the SBAH cluster assessed the patient and “operated on the eye that had the better prospect of retaining vision.”

“Accordingly, we sympathise with the patient and acknowledge the distress associated with deteriorating or lost vision,” Mabona said.

Mabona added that the patient had been counselled and informed that the prognosis for the other eye was poor and that surgery was unlikely to restore vision. He said it was “inaccurate and misleading to attribute the irreversible loss of vision solely to the equipment and infrastructure challenges at the Hospital.”

Procurement delays acknowledged but causation disputed

The department acknowledged procurement delays related to infrastructure issues that had affected service delivery and said procurement processes were “at an advanced stage” to obtain necessary equipment, with delivery “expected in due course.”

Mabona said the department was concerned about what it called the “continued careless handling of confidential and complex clinical matters without first establishing the full facts,” and urged that health matters be communicated responsibly and based on verified clinical information.

Ongoing clinical pathways

He said the department continued to prioritise restoration of affected services, maintenance of essential infrastructure and medical equipment, and appropriate referral pathways between facilities. “Patients requiring specialist ophthalmic care will continue to be clinically assessed and referred to facilities capable of providing the required interventions,” Mabona added.