Summary
Ms C complained about the care and treatment provided to her by the board. She complained that, when she suffered a slipped disc in her back, she was not given appropriate neurosurgical treatment during two periods of care. Ms C also complained that she was later not provided with reasonable treatment by the department for infectious diseases, cardiology, or rheumatology.
We took advice from a neurosurgeon, a consultant in infectious diseases, a cardiologist and a rheumatologist. We found that, whilst overall the neurosurgical care given to Ms C was reasonable, there was a failure to properly document an appointment; that there was no evidence that the likely outcome of surgery was discussed with Ms C; and that there was a delay in follow-up after Ms C underwent surgery. We upheld this aspect of Ms C's complaint.
We found that the care and treatment provided by the department for infectious diseases, cardiology, and rheumatology was of a reasonable standard and we did not uphold this aspect of Ms C's complaint.
Recommendations
What we asked the organisation to do in this case: Apologise to Ms C for the documentation of the neurosurgical appointment falling short of the standard expected; for the lack of evidence that that the likely outcome of surgery was discussed with Ms C as part of the consent process; and for the unreasonable delay between surgery and Ms C's follow-up appointment. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at: www.spso.org.uk/leaflets-and-guidance.
What we said should change to put things right in future: Documentation of appointments should be in line with General Medical Council guidance. The likely outcome of surgery should be discussed and documented as part of the consent process. Follow-up after surgery should be carried out in a timely manner.
We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201700231 as a PDF (12.9 KB) Updated: December 2, 2018