Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board - Acute Services Division

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 201405904 Sector Health Category clinical treatment / diagnosis Decided 01 November 2015

View NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde scorecard

Full decision

Summary

Mr C complained that he had not received appropriate care following an operation on his urinary tract. He said that because the consultant had not examined him appropriately at a post-operative consultation, the consultant did not realise that Mr C's condition had deteriorated. Mr C said that meant that he was in significant discomfort until a further consultation six months later, when the problem was identified and he underwent a further operation. He was then taught a technique for self-help which aimed to support the work of the operation, to avoid a further recurrence. Mr C complained that the board had not referred him for this self-help technique after his first operation.

We sought independent advice from a urology consultant. Our adviser noted that there was limited information on file about what happened at the post-operative consultation, but that given the concerns expressed by Mr C (and referred to in the records) it would have been reasonable for the consultant to have examined Mr C in more detail, and undertaken various tests to identify how his condition had changed. Our adviser was critical of this, and of the limited information in the notes from the consultation. However, our adviser also noted that while some consultants may sometimes refer patients to the self-help technique after a first operation, it was reasonable that Mr C was not taught this until after his second operation.

We were critical of the level of follow-up Mr C was given following his first operation, particularly given the concerns he raised during his consultation. We noted that, while the clinical notes provided limited information about what was discussed, we were satisfied that Mr C raised concerns which were not sufficiently investigated. We were also critical of the level of record-keeping.

Recommendations

We recommended that the board: highlight the findings of this investigation to the consultant involved, and remind him of the General Medical Council's requirements in relation to record-keeping; and apologise to Mr C for failing to provide an appropriate level of treatment during his first post-operative consultation.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201405904 as a PDF (12.9 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board - A…

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202405247 01 May 2026 C complained about the care and treatment provided to their parent (A). A had dementia and had suffered several falls. … Partly Upheld
202502009 01 May 2026 C complained that they were inappropriately triaged at A&E because sepsis had not been considered, their symptoms and history were … Not Upheld
202409771 01 May 2026 C complained about the care and treatment provided by nursing staff to their late sibling (A), who was admitted to … Upheld
202406274 01 May 2026 C complained about the care and treatment of their adult child (A) following A’s admission to hospital. A had a … Partly Upheld
202405343 01 May 2026 C complained about the care and treatment that their late partner (A) received from the board’s gynaecology and oncology services … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation