Summary
Miss C and Miss B complained to us about the care and treatment their uncle (Mr A) had received from the board. Mr A had been admitted to Monklands Hospital with shortness of breath. He was discharged from hospital three weeks later. Miss C and Miss B complained that it had been unreasonable to discharge Mr A at that time because of his immobility and a lack of adequate discharge arrangements.
We took independent advice from a consultant in acute medicine. We found that Mr A had been medically fit for discharge, although there were some concerns about how he would manage. Although we found that, ideally, there should have been additional support in place for Mr A when he was discharged, we did not consider that the discharge arrangements the board put in place were unreasonable. On balance, we did not uphold this aspect of the complaint.
Miss C and Miss B also complained about the care and treatment Mr A received from both medical and nursing staff at his home when his condition deteriorated. We found that the care and treatment provided to Mr A, including treatment for an infection, had been reasonable. We did not uphold this aspect of the complaint.
Mr A was subsequently readmitted to hospital and died there two days later. Miss C and Miss B complained to us about the standard of care and treatment provided to Mr A in hospital before his death. We found that there had been a short delay in communicating Mr A's deterioration to his family and that the timing in relation to asking the family to complete a document about his interests and preferences at the time he was deteriorating was inappropriate and insensitive. However, we found that the care and treatment provided to Mr A had been reasonable and appropriate. It was also reasonable that he was not transferred to the intensive care unit. In view of this, we did not uphold this aspect of the complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201605243 as a PDF (11.4 KB) Updated: December 2, 2018