Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Grampian NHS Board

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 201301821 Sector Health Category clinical treatment / diagnosis Decided 01 March 2015

View NHS Grampian scorecard

Full decision

Summary

Mr C was diagnosed with alopecia (hair loss) as a child. It became progressively worse and he now suffers from alopecia universalis (a condition where a patient has no body hair). Mr C's GP referred him to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary where he saw a consultant dermatologist. Mr C complained about the care and treatment he was given which he believed was neither reasonable nor appropriate. He said that he had been forced to take medication that was ineffective and possibly had long-term side effects. He questioned his treatment plan and said that he had not been properly reviewed. Mr C was unhappy that he had not been prescribed an experimental treatment and said that the board did not provide him with appropriate support.

We took independent medical advice on the complaint from a dermatology specialist. Our adviser said that alopecia universalis has a very poor prognosis and that there is little or nothing that is effective in its treatment. The treatment given to Mr C was reasonable and appropriate and in accordance with his symptoms but, given the devastating consequences of this condition, we upheld his complaints as our adviser said that the board did not go as far as could have been reasonably expected to treat him. They did not seek support from neighbouring health board services or try to establish whether there were medical trials that might assist him. Their follow-up was poor, as a consequence of which he was effectively discharged and lost his wig entitlement, and had to visit his GP again for a further referral. Our adviser said that the board were, however, correct to refuse him the unlicensed treatment that he sought.

Recommendations

We recommended that the board: make a formal apology for their oversights in this matter; bring our findings to the consultant dermatologist's attention for him to reflect upon; make a formal apology in recognition of these failures; and emphasise to staff the importance of responding to complaints in a full and timely manner.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201301821 as a PDF (13.75 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Grampian NHS Board

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202504517 01 May 2026 C complained about the care and treatment that they received in A&E, and the subsequent handling of their complaint by … Upheld
202401974 01 May 2026 C complained about the standard of care provided to their parent (A) by the board in relation to a scan … Upheld
202501264 01 Mar 2026 C complained about the care and treatment that their spouse (A) received from the board during admissions to Dr Gray’s … Upheld
202402498 01 Sep 2025 C complained that the board failed to carry out their sibling (A)'s hip replacement surgery within a reasonable time. C … Upheld
202305315 01 Aug 2025 C, a Patient Advice and Support Service (PASS) adviser, complained on behalf of their client (B) about the care and … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation