Summary
Ms C, who works for an advocacy and support agency, complained on behalf of her client (Mr A). Mr A had experienced symptoms of pain and numbness in his left foot. After he attended a number of consultations in the board's podiatry and orthopaedic services, he underwent surgery at Gartnavel General Hospital to fuse one of the joints in a toe. Following the operation, Mr A continued to experience pain and numbness and he attended a number of review appointments in the orthopaedic department before being discharged approximately a year after the procedure.
Ms C complained that the board did not perform appropriate orthopaedic surgery on Mr A, and said that Mr A was not informed of the possible side effects of surgery.
We took independent advice from an orthopaedic surgeon. The adviser was satisfied that Mr A was appropriately informed of the potential side effects of the procedure and that consent was obtained appropriately and in accordance with the board's consent policy. Furthermore, the adviser considered that the records indicated that the operation was carried out to a reasonable standard. In view of this advice, we did not uphold this aspect of Ms C's complaint.
Ms C also raised concern that Mr A did not receive appropriate treatment following surgery when he reported further concerns to the surgeon. We found that Mr A had attended three review appointments in the orthopaedic department following the surgery and that by the point of discharge the surgeon was satisfied that the toe joint had healed well. The adviser did not find evidence of failings in the aftercare provided to Mr A. We did not uphold this aspect of Ms C's complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201603982 as a PDF (11.39 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018