Summary
Miss C complained about treatment she received at the Glasgow Dental Hospital. She provided a copy of the board’s response to her complaint. Our initial view was that the actions the board said they took in response to her complaint were reasonable. These actions were, firstly, that a clinician would review Miss C’s case and bring to the attention of all staff the need for clear and open communication with all patients. Secondly, Miss C’s case would be used as a learning opportunity with staff.
We asked the board for evidence of the actions they took. We found that the review of Miss C’s case by the clinician was done as part of the board’s investigation into her complaint. The board should have told Miss C that the clinician had reviewed her case as part of their investigation, rather than promising future action which had, in fact, already happened for a different purpose. The board were unable to provide us with sufficient evidence that the other actions had been carried out. We upheld Miss C’s complaint, and recommended that the board take the actions they told her they would.
Recommendations
We recommended that the board: bring to the attention of all staff within the service the need for clear and open communication with all patients; ensure that Miss C's case is used as a learning tool with staff; and ensure that Miss C's case is discussed with the dentist involved.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201501352 as a PDF (12.87 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018