Summary
C complained on behalf of their client (B) in relation to the care and treatment provided to B’s spouse (A) whilst A was a patient within the board. A had a complex medical history and was referred to Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, receiving care and treatment over two days. B’s specific concerns related to a procedure A underwent on the second day. On that day, CT scan findings showed the presence of a large liver abscess which was possibly the result of a perforated gallbladder. Treatment options were reviewed and the best option was considered to be draining the abscess percutaneously (by accessing the abscess through the skin rather than operating and opening the abdomen). A passed away that day.
C told us that B believed that the procedure was not the best clinical option for A and that A would not have died had the procedure not been undertaken. B felt that A’s judgement was impaired because of medication which they had been prescribed, and as such was not competent at the time of making the decision to have the procedure, so could not agree to it.
We took independent advice from a surgical adviser. We found that the care A received during their admission was reasonable and followed accepted management pathways. We noted that the board assessed and provided the best clinical option of treatment. We found no evidence to suggest that A was impaired by the medication prescribed to them and as such was competent to consent to the procedure. We did not uphold C's complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201902794 as a PDF (24.51 KB) Updated: November 18, 2020