Millie Bowers will never lead a fully independent life due to brain injuries blamed on mistakes by medics at Guildford's Royal Surrey County Hospital.
An 11-year-old girl, stricken by "catastrophic" brain injuries blamed on mistakes by medics at the Royal Surrey County Hospital, has won the right to a compensation pay-out in London's High Court.
Millie Bowers cannot walk unaided and will never lead a fully independent life due to a brain fever that developed in the months after her birth in September 2002.
Although a ‘sparky and animated’ youngster, she has lifelong learning difficulties, Mrs Justice Carr told the court on Wednesday June 25.
Millie was born prematurely while her parents were on holiday in Turkey in autumn 2002, and she developed a meningitis-like infection in the weeks after her delivery.
The family lived in Surrey at the time, and she was rushed to the Royal Surrey when just 25 days old, her QC, James Badenoch, told the court, and seemed to be making ‘satisfactory’ progress after being given antibiotics.
However, the barrister claimed medical staff at the hospital negligently failed to refer her for specialist neurological treatment to deal with a dangerous build-up of fluid within her brain.
By the time she was referred to London’s Kings College Hospital for surgery in December 2002 it was too late to save her from brain damage, it was claimed.
Millie – who is suing through her father Andrew Bowers – claimed damages from the Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, which admitted negligence.
Mrs Justice Carr said the trust had made an ‘early admission of breach of duty’ in failing to refer Millie to a specialist unit by late November 2002.
She said the issue of precisely what caused Millie's permanent disabilities remained ‘very much in issue,’ since lawyers for the NHS Trust insisted that her injuries were all but irreversible by late November.
Mr Badenoch acknowledged that, had the case gone to trial, Millie would have faced substantial ‘litigation risks’.
However, he described the process of referring Millie to specialists as ‘frankly shambolic’.
Michael De Navarro QC, for the trust, said the referral delay may have been due to fault on the part of other hospitals.
Mr Badenoch told the judge both sides had finally been able to hammer out a settlement which eliminated the need for a contested trial from which Millie could have come away with nothing.
The trust agreed to compensate the youngster on the basis of 75% of the full value of her claim.
Approving the deal, Mrs Justice Carr paid tribute to Millie and her parents’ ‘selfless devotion’ over the years.
The amount of Millie’s compensation will be assessed at a later date. Even after a 25% deduction, her award is likely to run well into seven figures in order to pay the lifetime of care and assistance she will need.
“The assessment of damages can hopefully be completed as soon as possible to bring some finality to this case,” said Justice Carr.
This article is courtesy of Get Surrey.
Regularly updated blog featuring news, articles and information relating to clinical/medical negligence.
Monday, 30 June 2014
Friday, 27 June 2014
Mum dies after cervical cancer misdiagnosed 30 times
A mother-of-four died after doctors missed 30 chances to diagnose her cervical cancer, an inquest heard.
Jeannine Harvey, 33, was so debilitated by pain she was unable to get out of bed without help.
However, despite consultations with her GP and doctors at three hospitals, her cervical cancer was repeatedly misdiagnosed as a potential torn ligament, protruding discs, sarcoma and "nerve pain".
Doctors even suggested at one point that her agony was caused by anxiety.
Miss Harvey's sister became so desperate for her sibling to be treated she once got down on her knees and begged doctors to admit her.
By the time medics realised the accountancy student - whose youngest child was only two when she died - was suffering from advanced uterine cancer of the cervix, it was too late.
She died at a hospice in July 2012 - eight months after a blood test first raised concerns.
Miss Harvey died of uterine cancer of the cervix, which was misdiagnosed on more than 30 occasions.
Repeated failures were made by medical staff to recognise, diagnose and treat her, the inquest heard.
Miss Harvey's sister, Marie Donovan, said ahead of the inquest: "All we've ever wanted is for someone to tell us how it was possible for medical professionals to miss so many opportunities to correctly diagnose and treat our sister, whose suffering and death were entirely preventable.
"Throughout Jeannine's illness, we got the impression that no one was listening to us, and felt doctors were constantly patronising us by saying it was Jeannine's anxiety that was making her pain worse."
Speaking three months after her death, Ms Donovan, from West Heath, Birmingham, said her sister's treatment was "like something out of the Dark Ages".
She added: "My beautiful sister was in agony, she was crippled with pain, but no one listened to her."
Miss Harvey left behind four children who, at the time of her death, were Paul, 16, Jack, 12, Frankie, five, and Ella, two.
Miss Harvey, from the West Middlands first complained of pain in her left leg and abdomen in December 2011.
An ultrasound scan - conducted after the blood test for ovarian cancer came back "elevated" - revealed a mass 4cm wide in her pelvic area.
But a laparoscopy six weeks later at City Hospital in Birmingham, appeared to show the mass had vanished, and she was sent back to her GP for physiotherapy.
Days later and still in pain, she was taken to accident and emergency at Sandwell Hospital where doctors diagnosed a possible torn ligament.
An MRI scan in March 2012 led to a new diagnosis of protruding discs, with doctors claiming anxiety was the main source of her pain.
Ms Donovan claims that, when her sister was finally admitted to the Medical Assessment Unit at City Hospital on April 18 2012, she was in such a poor state a nurse assumed she was a cancer patient.
Days later, Miss Harvey was misdiagnosed again, this time with sarcoma - a type of cancer that develops in connective tissues.
A routine biopsy at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth Hospital prior to starting chemotherapy found squamous cell tissue, which could only have originated in the cervix.
By the time her treatment began, the tumour - now 8cm - had become infected and shattered her pelvic bone. She was admitted to a hospice on July 13 2012 and died ten days later.
Jill Davies, the family's lawyer at national law firm Access Legal, said: "This is one of the most tragic and distressing cases I have seen and it has implications for the diagnosis and timely treatment of cancer on a national basis.
"Even if Jeannine could not have been cured, it is possible that with an earlier correct diagnosis she may have avoided months of pain at the end of her life."
Cervical cancer is a rare type of cancer that develops in a woman's cervix.
It often has no symptoms in the early stages meaning it is often not diagnosed until it is more advanced.
A Facebook page called Justice4Jeannine was set up by Miss Harvey's family shortly after her death to share her story with the wider world.
Ms Donovan said: "Nothing can ever bring our sister back, but we know her story has made a difference.
"We've had messages from people who say Jeannine's case has pushed them not to accept an initial diagnosis, good or bad, and go for further tests.
"Because of Jeannine, many people are alive and receiving treatment today who otherwise might have died in similar circumstances."
Roger Stedman, medical director at Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, said: "Our sincere condolences are passed on to Jeannine's family at this very difficult time and we are sorry for the distress suffered.
"Following Jeannine's death we carried out a detailed internal investigation where we identified several areas where we fell short in our expected high standard of care.
"This included a failure to make an adequate and timely diagnosis and our failure to adequately treat Jeannine's pain as a result, in the last days of her life.
"We have met with Jeannine's family and expressed our sincere apologies for these failings and would wish to extend that apology again.
"Our investigations indicate that an MRI of Jeannine's pelvis should have been carried out following a laparoscopy performed in February 2012, and for this we are truly sorry.
"It is clear that appropriate treatment would have brought forward the date of diagnosis and would have prevented pain and suffering.
"Sadly, it would appear that Jeannine's cancer was already at a stage that it would not have been curable."
This article is courtesy of The New Zealand Herald.
Jeannine Harvey, 33, was so debilitated by pain she was unable to get out of bed without help.
However, despite consultations with her GP and doctors at three hospitals, her cervical cancer was repeatedly misdiagnosed as a potential torn ligament, protruding discs, sarcoma and "nerve pain".
Doctors even suggested at one point that her agony was caused by anxiety.
Miss Harvey's sister became so desperate for her sibling to be treated she once got down on her knees and begged doctors to admit her.
By the time medics realised the accountancy student - whose youngest child was only two when she died - was suffering from advanced uterine cancer of the cervix, it was too late.
She died at a hospice in July 2012 - eight months after a blood test first raised concerns.
Miss Harvey died of uterine cancer of the cervix, which was misdiagnosed on more than 30 occasions.
Repeated failures were made by medical staff to recognise, diagnose and treat her, the inquest heard.
Miss Harvey's sister, Marie Donovan, said ahead of the inquest: "All we've ever wanted is for someone to tell us how it was possible for medical professionals to miss so many opportunities to correctly diagnose and treat our sister, whose suffering and death were entirely preventable.
"Throughout Jeannine's illness, we got the impression that no one was listening to us, and felt doctors were constantly patronising us by saying it was Jeannine's anxiety that was making her pain worse."
Speaking three months after her death, Ms Donovan, from West Heath, Birmingham, said her sister's treatment was "like something out of the Dark Ages".
She added: "My beautiful sister was in agony, she was crippled with pain, but no one listened to her."
Miss Harvey left behind four children who, at the time of her death, were Paul, 16, Jack, 12, Frankie, five, and Ella, two.
Miss Harvey, from the West Middlands first complained of pain in her left leg and abdomen in December 2011.
An ultrasound scan - conducted after the blood test for ovarian cancer came back "elevated" - revealed a mass 4cm wide in her pelvic area.
But a laparoscopy six weeks later at City Hospital in Birmingham, appeared to show the mass had vanished, and she was sent back to her GP for physiotherapy.
Days later and still in pain, she was taken to accident and emergency at Sandwell Hospital where doctors diagnosed a possible torn ligament.
An MRI scan in March 2012 led to a new diagnosis of protruding discs, with doctors claiming anxiety was the main source of her pain.
Ms Donovan claims that, when her sister was finally admitted to the Medical Assessment Unit at City Hospital on April 18 2012, she was in such a poor state a nurse assumed she was a cancer patient.
Days later, Miss Harvey was misdiagnosed again, this time with sarcoma - a type of cancer that develops in connective tissues.
A routine biopsy at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth Hospital prior to starting chemotherapy found squamous cell tissue, which could only have originated in the cervix.
By the time her treatment began, the tumour - now 8cm - had become infected and shattered her pelvic bone. She was admitted to a hospice on July 13 2012 and died ten days later.
Jill Davies, the family's lawyer at national law firm Access Legal, said: "This is one of the most tragic and distressing cases I have seen and it has implications for the diagnosis and timely treatment of cancer on a national basis.
"Even if Jeannine could not have been cured, it is possible that with an earlier correct diagnosis she may have avoided months of pain at the end of her life."
Cervical cancer is a rare type of cancer that develops in a woman's cervix.
It often has no symptoms in the early stages meaning it is often not diagnosed until it is more advanced.
A Facebook page called Justice4Jeannine was set up by Miss Harvey's family shortly after her death to share her story with the wider world.
Ms Donovan said: "Nothing can ever bring our sister back, but we know her story has made a difference.
"We've had messages from people who say Jeannine's case has pushed them not to accept an initial diagnosis, good or bad, and go for further tests.
"Because of Jeannine, many people are alive and receiving treatment today who otherwise might have died in similar circumstances."
Roger Stedman, medical director at Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, said: "Our sincere condolences are passed on to Jeannine's family at this very difficult time and we are sorry for the distress suffered.
"Following Jeannine's death we carried out a detailed internal investigation where we identified several areas where we fell short in our expected high standard of care.
"This included a failure to make an adequate and timely diagnosis and our failure to adequately treat Jeannine's pain as a result, in the last days of her life.
"We have met with Jeannine's family and expressed our sincere apologies for these failings and would wish to extend that apology again.
"Our investigations indicate that an MRI of Jeannine's pelvis should have been carried out following a laparoscopy performed in February 2012, and for this we are truly sorry.
"It is clear that appropriate treatment would have brought forward the date of diagnosis and would have prevented pain and suffering.
"Sadly, it would appear that Jeannine's cancer was already at a stage that it would not have been curable."
This article is courtesy of The New Zealand Herald.
Wednesday, 25 June 2014
Boy, 7, awarded £8 million compensation package after care "deficiencies"
A seven-year-old boy stricken by catastrophic brain damage after his birth at Queen’s Medical Centre has won an £8 million compensation package - plus a public apology for the "deficiencies" in his care.
The boy, who cannot walk or speak, was left with profound lifelong cerebral palsy after medics mishandled desperate attempts to resuscitate him following his delivery at the hospital in November 2006, London's High Court heard.
Mr Justice Lewis, who approved a settlement designed to meet all the youngster's lifetime needs, said he had "suffered complications" following his birth, after which hospital staff "failed to provide adequate treatment for him".
"There were deficiencies in the way the hospital dealt with the need to resuscitate him", said the judge, who added that the hospital has "since taken steps to correct what went wrong so that other families won't be faced with the same difficulties".
The boy, from Nottingham, is able to smile and respond to his large family - whose devoted care was today praised by the judge.
But he also needs a team of carers to get him through the day and has acute learning difficulties, his lawyers disclosed after the short hearing.
The case reached the High Court as his parents sought the judge's approval for a compensation package to be met by the hospital's managers, the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, which admitted liability.
The lad's mum was in court to hear the NHS Trust's barrister, William Wraight, publicly apologise for the post natal blunders.
"There were deficiencies in the provision of resuscitation on that day but these problems have been identified and corrected," said Mr Wraight.
Mr Justice Lewis approved a settlement which takes the form of a £3.25 million lump sum, plus annual, index-linked and tax-free payments to cover the enormous costs of his care for life.
Those payments will start at £146,500-a-year, rising to £230,000 beyond the age of 19. Lawyers estimate the total settlement will be worth between £8 million and £9 million over the boy's lifetime.
Mr Justice Lewis said he was satisfied the settlement was "just and appropriate", also commending the boy's parents and family, saying: "He is really lucky to have a family like this. I wish them all well."
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust has apologised to the family.
Chief executive Peter Homa, said: “We reiterate our sincere and unreserved apologies to the family.
“Whilst no amount of money can compensate for nor undo the harm and distress the family have experienced as a result of this tragic case, we hope this settlement provides the family with financial security for the future.”
This article is courtesy of the Nottingham Post.
The boy, who cannot walk or speak, was left with profound lifelong cerebral palsy after medics mishandled desperate attempts to resuscitate him following his delivery at the hospital in November 2006, London's High Court heard.
Mr Justice Lewis, who approved a settlement designed to meet all the youngster's lifetime needs, said he had "suffered complications" following his birth, after which hospital staff "failed to provide adequate treatment for him".
"There were deficiencies in the way the hospital dealt with the need to resuscitate him", said the judge, who added that the hospital has "since taken steps to correct what went wrong so that other families won't be faced with the same difficulties".
The boy, from Nottingham, is able to smile and respond to his large family - whose devoted care was today praised by the judge.
But he also needs a team of carers to get him through the day and has acute learning difficulties, his lawyers disclosed after the short hearing.
The case reached the High Court as his parents sought the judge's approval for a compensation package to be met by the hospital's managers, the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, which admitted liability.
The lad's mum was in court to hear the NHS Trust's barrister, William Wraight, publicly apologise for the post natal blunders.
"There were deficiencies in the provision of resuscitation on that day but these problems have been identified and corrected," said Mr Wraight.
Mr Justice Lewis approved a settlement which takes the form of a £3.25 million lump sum, plus annual, index-linked and tax-free payments to cover the enormous costs of his care for life.
Those payments will start at £146,500-a-year, rising to £230,000 beyond the age of 19. Lawyers estimate the total settlement will be worth between £8 million and £9 million over the boy's lifetime.
Mr Justice Lewis said he was satisfied the settlement was "just and appropriate", also commending the boy's parents and family, saying: "He is really lucky to have a family like this. I wish them all well."
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust has apologised to the family.
Chief executive Peter Homa, said: “We reiterate our sincere and unreserved apologies to the family.
“Whilst no amount of money can compensate for nor undo the harm and distress the family have experienced as a result of this tragic case, we hope this settlement provides the family with financial security for the future.”
This article is courtesy of the Nottingham Post.
Monday, 23 June 2014
ME: one third of patients 'wrongly diagnosed'
A third of the people who believe they have Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, or ME, may be suffering from a treatable illness, a professor claims.
There is currently no medication for ME, which is characterised by fatigue, muscle aches and memory loss.
However, Prof Julia Newton, of the Institute for Ageing and Health at Newcastle University, believes that doctors often wrongly diagnose ME when people are suffering from Postural tachycardia syndrome (PoTS).
PoTS is a disorder of the nervous system that disrupts the body’s automatic functions, such as breathing.
Symptoms include dizziness, rapid heartbeat, fainting, nausea, excessive tiredness and trembling. Young women are most likely to be affected by the ailment, which afflicts about 110,000 people in Britain.
It can be treated with beta-blockers and lifestyle changes. However, few doctors have ever heard of it.
Prof Newton says about 80,000 of the 250,000 ME suffers may have the condition. “I would think that around one third of people with chronic fatigue syndrome, if they were properly tested, would have PoTS,” she said.
“PoTS is an abnormal response of the nervous system, but it is a spectrum, so some people will feel dizzy on standing, while others will actually black out. It affects the part of the nervous system which is outside our control.”
Although doctors are unclear as to what causes the problem, Prof Newton believes it may be caused by a viral infection or hormonal changes.
Prof Newton’s team studied 84 members of the national charity and support group PoTS UK and a further 52 patients who had been diagnosed at an NHS falls clinic in Newcastle between 2009 and 2012.
The participants completed questionnaires to gauge levels of fatigue; anxiety and depression; ability to carry out tasks; and mental power.
It was found that people with PoTS were predominantly young, well-educated and female.
Prof Newton said: “Our experience suggests that some patients never recover.”
The findings were reported in the online journal BMJ Open.
This article is courtesy of the Telegraph.
There is currently no medication for ME, which is characterised by fatigue, muscle aches and memory loss.
However, Prof Julia Newton, of the Institute for Ageing and Health at Newcastle University, believes that doctors often wrongly diagnose ME when people are suffering from Postural tachycardia syndrome (PoTS).
PoTS is a disorder of the nervous system that disrupts the body’s automatic functions, such as breathing.
Symptoms include dizziness, rapid heartbeat, fainting, nausea, excessive tiredness and trembling. Young women are most likely to be affected by the ailment, which afflicts about 110,000 people in Britain.
It can be treated with beta-blockers and lifestyle changes. However, few doctors have ever heard of it.
Prof Newton says about 80,000 of the 250,000 ME suffers may have the condition. “I would think that around one third of people with chronic fatigue syndrome, if they were properly tested, would have PoTS,” she said.
“PoTS is an abnormal response of the nervous system, but it is a spectrum, so some people will feel dizzy on standing, while others will actually black out. It affects the part of the nervous system which is outside our control.”
Although doctors are unclear as to what causes the problem, Prof Newton believes it may be caused by a viral infection or hormonal changes.
Prof Newton’s team studied 84 members of the national charity and support group PoTS UK and a further 52 patients who had been diagnosed at an NHS falls clinic in Newcastle between 2009 and 2012.
The participants completed questionnaires to gauge levels of fatigue; anxiety and depression; ability to carry out tasks; and mental power.
It was found that people with PoTS were predominantly young, well-educated and female.
Prof Newton said: “Our experience suggests that some patients never recover.”
The findings were reported in the online journal BMJ Open.
This article is courtesy of the Telegraph.
Friday, 20 June 2014
Parents of brain damaged woman tell of lifelong struggle to care for daughter and why they blame 'forgotten Thalidomide' pill for her condition
Parents of brain damaged woman tell of lifelong struggle to care for daughter and why they blame 'forgotten Thalidomide' pill for her condition
Rose and Bobby Stallard were thrilled when their longed-for daughter Elizabeth was born after a normal pregnancy and uncomplicated, natural home delivery.
The couple already had two boys and baby Elizabeth was another blessing in their family.
But just months later they were told their daughter had brain damage. Then their lives changed forever.
Now they have spoken about their lifelong struggle to care for their daughter, who they believe was damaged by a commonly prescribed pill known as the “forgotten Thalidomide”.
It was prescribed to pregnant women in the 1960s and 1970s.
Now Rose and Bobby, of Chapelhall, Lanarkshire – along with numerous other families who claim the pill caused miscarriages and birth defects – are relaunching a fight to get compensation for their daughter, who is now 44 years old.
But most of all they want answers as to why they were given a drug that was removed from the market in 1978 after 1.5million pregnant women in the UK had taken it.
Rose, 67, was given Primodos, an oral hormone test, which was used to determine if women were pregnant.
She said: “I was told to take one Primodos tablet in the morning and one at night.
“The doctor said if I didn’t bleed then I was pregnant but I did and it wasn’t until I went back weeks later that it turned out I really was having a baby.
“My pregnancy with Elizabeth went without a hitch.
“She was delivered at home in June 1970 without any drugs and my husband Bobby and I were happy to have our little bundle.”
But Rose, also mum to George, 48, William, 47, and Bobby, 41, said that within the first year they noticed Elizabeth was not progressing at the same rate as her niece of the same age.
She said: “I went to the doctor who examined her, then sent us to Yorkhill where a doctor flatly told me, ‘Your daughter is brain damaged’. Bobby and I were in pieces. We didn’t know what to do. Something had happened to our child and no one could tell me what, when or why.”
For years Rose felt she had nowhere to turn until she read the plight of another mother in the Daily Record in the late 1970s who, like her, had taken Primodos and had a child with disabilities.
And Rose believed Elizabeth could have been damaged by the drug, too.
As she looked into it, she found women across the UK who took the drug had given birth to babies with missing limbs, problems with their organs and other birth defects. The couple then got in touch with the Association For Children Damaged By Hormone Pregnancy Testing.
Rose said: “There were people who have been born without limbs, some deformed, women who had miscarried – the list was just endless.
“But what we all had in common was that we had taken the Primodos drug during pregnancy with no warnings.”
Primodos was used by GPs to determine whether a woman was pregnant until 1978.
Rose only took Primodos when she was expecting Elizabeth.
Bobby, 68, said: “Elizabeth was a beautiful little girl and, with two boys by that point, we were so excited to have a daughter. Instead, she has been so badly affected she cannot feed, bathe or dress herself.
“I’ll never be able to walk my little girl down the aisle, she will never have a family of her own and, as we get older, we worry about who will care for her when we are not here to look after her.
“We trusted in the National Health Service. I’d like to know why this drug was ever given the go-ahead.”
The couple are also waiting for Elizabeth, who was diagnosed by doctors at Yorkhill sick children’s hospital in Glasgow as having brain damage, to have a brain scan – something she’s never been offered.
Rose said: “I understand that handing out brain scan appointments wasn’t the norm 40 years ago but we are still asking for one now.
“But no matter how we ask, the doctors have not as yet, in four decades, given her a brain scan. We feel like they’ve already written her off.”
In 1982, a group action against Schering Chemicals, the pharmaceutical company that produced Primodos, was shelved.
But the recent discovery of documents at the National Archives in London has prompted victims to demand a government investigation and a review of a legal action that failed more than 30 years ago.
It has now emerged that 26 studies from 1960 onwards suggested the drug may have caused miscarriages and birth defects, yet it remained on the market.
Campaigners are now pushing for a public inquiry and compensation for victims.
Rose added: “I hope that it is proved the drug was responsible for what happened to all these children.
“I hope that finally gives families like ours some relief that someone has owned up for what they have done to our lives.”
Marie Lyon, chairperson of the Association For Children Damaged By Hormone Pregnancy Testing, said: “Our aim is to finally obtain the facts hidden in sealed files to prove the negligence of the Committee On Safety Of Medicines. An all-party parliamentary group are holding a meeting today in the House of Commons, after delivering a petition to Downing Street.
“Our determination to obtain the truth about the failure of the Committee On Safety Of Medicines is unshakeable.”
A spokesperson for Bayer, which acquired Schering in 2006, said: “Bayer denies Primodos was responsible for causing any deformities in children.
“UK litigation in respect of Primodos against Schering ended in 1982 when the claimants’ legal team, with the approval of the court, decided to discontinue the litigation on the grounds that there was no realistic possibility of showing that Primodos caused the congenital abnormalities alleged.
“Since the discontinuation of the legal action in 1982, no new scientific knowledge has been produced that would call into question the validity of the previous assessment.”
A spokesperson for NHS Lanarkshire said: “While we cannot discuss the details of individual cases due to patient confidentiality, we are fully aware of this family’s situation and are continuing to work with them to reach a satisfactory conclusion.
“Any decision to refer a patient for any further investigation is based on a range of factors, which take into consideration the patient’s overall condition.
“We would urge the family to contact our patient affairs department directly.”
This article is courtesy of the Daily Record.
Rose and Bobby Stallard were thrilled when their longed-for daughter Elizabeth was born after a normal pregnancy and uncomplicated, natural home delivery.
The couple already had two boys and baby Elizabeth was another blessing in their family.
But just months later they were told their daughter had brain damage. Then their lives changed forever.
Now they have spoken about their lifelong struggle to care for their daughter, who they believe was damaged by a commonly prescribed pill known as the “forgotten Thalidomide”.
It was prescribed to pregnant women in the 1960s and 1970s.
Now Rose and Bobby, of Chapelhall, Lanarkshire – along with numerous other families who claim the pill caused miscarriages and birth defects – are relaunching a fight to get compensation for their daughter, who is now 44 years old.
But most of all they want answers as to why they were given a drug that was removed from the market in 1978 after 1.5million pregnant women in the UK had taken it.
Rose, 67, was given Primodos, an oral hormone test, which was used to determine if women were pregnant.
She said: “I was told to take one Primodos tablet in the morning and one at night.
“The doctor said if I didn’t bleed then I was pregnant but I did and it wasn’t until I went back weeks later that it turned out I really was having a baby.
“My pregnancy with Elizabeth went without a hitch.
“She was delivered at home in June 1970 without any drugs and my husband Bobby and I were happy to have our little bundle.”
But Rose, also mum to George, 48, William, 47, and Bobby, 41, said that within the first year they noticed Elizabeth was not progressing at the same rate as her niece of the same age.
She said: “I went to the doctor who examined her, then sent us to Yorkhill where a doctor flatly told me, ‘Your daughter is brain damaged’. Bobby and I were in pieces. We didn’t know what to do. Something had happened to our child and no one could tell me what, when or why.”
For years Rose felt she had nowhere to turn until she read the plight of another mother in the Daily Record in the late 1970s who, like her, had taken Primodos and had a child with disabilities.
And Rose believed Elizabeth could have been damaged by the drug, too.
As she looked into it, she found women across the UK who took the drug had given birth to babies with missing limbs, problems with their organs and other birth defects. The couple then got in touch with the Association For Children Damaged By Hormone Pregnancy Testing.
Rose said: “There were people who have been born without limbs, some deformed, women who had miscarried – the list was just endless.
“But what we all had in common was that we had taken the Primodos drug during pregnancy with no warnings.”
Primodos was used by GPs to determine whether a woman was pregnant until 1978.
Rose only took Primodos when she was expecting Elizabeth.
Bobby, 68, said: “Elizabeth was a beautiful little girl and, with two boys by that point, we were so excited to have a daughter. Instead, she has been so badly affected she cannot feed, bathe or dress herself.
“I’ll never be able to walk my little girl down the aisle, she will never have a family of her own and, as we get older, we worry about who will care for her when we are not here to look after her.
“We trusted in the National Health Service. I’d like to know why this drug was ever given the go-ahead.”
The couple are also waiting for Elizabeth, who was diagnosed by doctors at Yorkhill sick children’s hospital in Glasgow as having brain damage, to have a brain scan – something she’s never been offered.
Rose said: “I understand that handing out brain scan appointments wasn’t the norm 40 years ago but we are still asking for one now.
“But no matter how we ask, the doctors have not as yet, in four decades, given her a brain scan. We feel like they’ve already written her off.”
In 1982, a group action against Schering Chemicals, the pharmaceutical company that produced Primodos, was shelved.
But the recent discovery of documents at the National Archives in London has prompted victims to demand a government investigation and a review of a legal action that failed more than 30 years ago.
It has now emerged that 26 studies from 1960 onwards suggested the drug may have caused miscarriages and birth defects, yet it remained on the market.
Campaigners are now pushing for a public inquiry and compensation for victims.
Rose added: “I hope that it is proved the drug was responsible for what happened to all these children.
“I hope that finally gives families like ours some relief that someone has owned up for what they have done to our lives.”
Marie Lyon, chairperson of the Association For Children Damaged By Hormone Pregnancy Testing, said: “Our aim is to finally obtain the facts hidden in sealed files to prove the negligence of the Committee On Safety Of Medicines. An all-party parliamentary group are holding a meeting today in the House of Commons, after delivering a petition to Downing Street.
“Our determination to obtain the truth about the failure of the Committee On Safety Of Medicines is unshakeable.”
A spokesperson for Bayer, which acquired Schering in 2006, said: “Bayer denies Primodos was responsible for causing any deformities in children.
“UK litigation in respect of Primodos against Schering ended in 1982 when the claimants’ legal team, with the approval of the court, decided to discontinue the litigation on the grounds that there was no realistic possibility of showing that Primodos caused the congenital abnormalities alleged.
“Since the discontinuation of the legal action in 1982, no new scientific knowledge has been produced that would call into question the validity of the previous assessment.”
A spokesperson for NHS Lanarkshire said: “While we cannot discuss the details of individual cases due to patient confidentiality, we are fully aware of this family’s situation and are continuing to work with them to reach a satisfactory conclusion.
“Any decision to refer a patient for any further investigation is based on a range of factors, which take into consideration the patient’s overall condition.
“We would urge the family to contact our patient affairs department directly.”
This article is courtesy of the Daily Record.
Wednesday, 18 June 2014
Health and social care integration – can it be done?
When the new Chief Executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens, made his inaugural speech in May to the NHS Confederation in Liverpool, setting out what he saw as the priorities for a reformed NHS, concerns about the future affordability of the NHS in its current guise continued to pepper the front pages. The most pressing worry is the impact of an aging population on health and social care resources – thrown into stark relief by news that the death of an elderly woman in a South Wales, apparently from unexplained injuries sustained while in hospital, is now the subject of a police investigation. A solution to the difficulty of coordinating medical and social care provided by two different entities on different charging bases is the creation of the Better Care Fund, due to be launched in 2015. The £3.8bn fund, jointly raised by the NHS and the Local Government Association (but with no additional funding from central government), is supposed to help support closer collaboration in local areas between the NHS and local authorities.
The impact of age
The average cost of providing healthcare for the retired population is £5,200 per household compared with £2,800 per household for the working population (source: ONS) and although life expectancy has increased, a commensurate improvement in health has not. According to Simon Stevens, 46% of hospital admissions are over retirement age, many of whom remain in hospital longer than needed due to a paucity of care home beds in the locality or because their own homes have not been adapted to enable to them to cope by themselves. Tales of poor care and neglect of the elderly have been reverberating around the NHS for some time now and, although, inexcusable on any level, it may well be a symptom of a system unable to cope with these demands. Hence the call for a reorganisation of the NHS so that primary, secondary and community care teams cooperate more effectively and so that a flexible approach can be developed to meet local needs.
The Better Care Fund
Originally conceived as a plan to ensure better alignment between the care provided by the NHS and that provided by social services, particularly in relation to older people, the project has got off to a rocky start. A recent Whitehall report has queried its viability by criticising its financial credibility, alleging that detailed plans for how savings are going to be made are in short supply. The original idea was that the £1.9bn contribution from the NHS would essentially pay for itself by the consequential savings made by freeing up hospital resources by moving elderly patients out of hospital either to care homes or to their own homes. However, it has been pointed out that much of the expenditure is fixed: salaries and equipment making up the bulk of costs.
A vision for a new improved NHS
Ann Clwyd has recently been called to give evidence into standards of care across Welsh hospitals in the light of her personal experience of the negligent care her husband received in hospital prior to his death, and her subsequent report into the NHS complaints system. In the course of compiling her report she received many letters from people who also had experience of the similar poor standards of care in Welsh hospitals. She believes that her experience of the “callous lack of care” afforded to her husband is not an isolated incident and that it reflects a wider malaise within the health system as whole. The improvement of the standard and delivery of care was the overarching theme in Simon Stevens’ speech; patient care and survivability were the key principles that should drive the changes. He spoke of making the NHS budget work harder by getting more bang for its buck; redesigning the core delivery of services to introduce more flexibility
In short
The Kings Fund health think tank has warned that the NHS is facing a financial crisis and considers plans like the Better Care Fund to be ill thought out and unhelpful on the basis that hospitals cannot afford to lose any of their funding. However, as NHS England’s chief executive has pointed out, raising standards of patient care is not just about money but also about attitude and culture. It is a question of highlighting areas of best practice and using it to transform those hospitals where standards need improving. All this will take time which means that medical negligence headlines will continue to grab people’s attention.
Jeanette Whyman is a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
Monday, 16 June 2014
Maternity services under pressure
A case in which I advised the parents of a four-day old baby who died in 2012 after being deprived of oxygen has recently been in the news as the family has only just received a five-figure settlement and an apology from Warwick Hospital. An inquest, held in June 2013, heard how failings in Daniel’s care during labour had led to his death. These included three different midwives failing to read his mother’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient; one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes; and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heart properly.
The testimony of Sarah Kunigiskis, mother of baby Daniel, makes harrowing reading. In addition to the grief of losing her baby was the refusal of the hospital to admit they were at fault while implying that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery. As she noted, the refusal of the hospital to acknowledge that a catastrophic error had occurred, made an awful situation far worse. One of the reasons Sarah was willing to speak out was to help put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made by encouraging others in
similar situations to challenge the experts if they feel things are not right.
NAO report into maternity services in England
The situation endured by the Kunigiskis family is not unfamiliar to medical negligence solicitors. Obstetrics is a particularly challenging area of medicine where there is, on the one hand, a desire not to medicalise a perfectly natural event but, on the other, a need to step in as soon as things start going wrong. A report released by the National Audit Office in November 2013 highlighted that some of the problems faced by maternity services in England were reflected in the fact that a third of the NHS litigation budget was absorbed by medical negligence cases relating to birth complications. In 2012 there were almost 700,000 live births, the highest rate for 40 years, putting considerable pressure on resources. There has also been a noticeable increase in the number of ‘high risk’ births including multiple births, women over 40 and women with obesity or pre-existing medical conditions. Although mortality rates have improved, the NAO report noted that there were ‘wide, unexplained variations in the performance of individual trusts in relation to complication rates and medical intervention rates, even after adjustment for maternal characteristics and clinical risk factors’.
Need to improve safety
The number of maternity-related medical negligence claims increased by 80% in the five years to 2012-13 resulting in a litigation bill for maternity claims alone amounting to £482m in 2012-13. This figure represents about a fifth of all spending on maternity services which is a sobering fact by anyone’s standards. The NAO report flagged a number of areas which might help to explain why medical negligence claims were so high: more than half the obstetric units in England did not have the number of consultants on site as recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; and midwife staffing levels fell below that recommended by a national benchmark of 29.5 births per midwife. In order to achieve this ratio, another 2,300 midwives would need to be recruited although even this would be further complicated by the fact that a large number of midwives were reaching retirement age and a growing proportion of student midwives were failing to complete their courses.
More cooperation, better data
Although, sadly, the Kunigiskis case is, by no means, an isolated incident, and despite the upward pressure on maternity services generally across the country, most women do have positive experiences of giving birth in a NHS hospital. However, there is clearly scope for major improvement, not least in order to reduce the phenomenal amount being paid out in medical negligence claims. Among the NAO recommendations is a call for more and better data on maternity services in order to track trends, outcomes and experiences; and clinical commissioning groups should look at how services are delivered in their area and look to cooperate with neighbouring trusts to ensure all available resources are used efficiently. Last but not least, hospitals need to own up to mistakes at the outset and endeavour to give the families a full an explanation of what went wrong. It is the very least they can do and might even help to reduce the number of claims made against them.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
The testimony of Sarah Kunigiskis, mother of baby Daniel, makes harrowing reading. In addition to the grief of losing her baby was the refusal of the hospital to admit they were at fault while implying that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery. As she noted, the refusal of the hospital to acknowledge that a catastrophic error had occurred, made an awful situation far worse. One of the reasons Sarah was willing to speak out was to help put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made by encouraging others in
similar situations to challenge the experts if they feel things are not right.
NAO report into maternity services in England
The situation endured by the Kunigiskis family is not unfamiliar to medical negligence solicitors. Obstetrics is a particularly challenging area of medicine where there is, on the one hand, a desire not to medicalise a perfectly natural event but, on the other, a need to step in as soon as things start going wrong. A report released by the National Audit Office in November 2013 highlighted that some of the problems faced by maternity services in England were reflected in the fact that a third of the NHS litigation budget was absorbed by medical negligence cases relating to birth complications. In 2012 there were almost 700,000 live births, the highest rate for 40 years, putting considerable pressure on resources. There has also been a noticeable increase in the number of ‘high risk’ births including multiple births, women over 40 and women with obesity or pre-existing medical conditions. Although mortality rates have improved, the NAO report noted that there were ‘wide, unexplained variations in the performance of individual trusts in relation to complication rates and medical intervention rates, even after adjustment for maternal characteristics and clinical risk factors’.
Need to improve safety
The number of maternity-related medical negligence claims increased by 80% in the five years to 2012-13 resulting in a litigation bill for maternity claims alone amounting to £482m in 2012-13. This figure represents about a fifth of all spending on maternity services which is a sobering fact by anyone’s standards. The NAO report flagged a number of areas which might help to explain why medical negligence claims were so high: more than half the obstetric units in England did not have the number of consultants on site as recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; and midwife staffing levels fell below that recommended by a national benchmark of 29.5 births per midwife. In order to achieve this ratio, another 2,300 midwives would need to be recruited although even this would be further complicated by the fact that a large number of midwives were reaching retirement age and a growing proportion of student midwives were failing to complete their courses.
More cooperation, better data
Although, sadly, the Kunigiskis case is, by no means, an isolated incident, and despite the upward pressure on maternity services generally across the country, most women do have positive experiences of giving birth in a NHS hospital. However, there is clearly scope for major improvement, not least in order to reduce the phenomenal amount being paid out in medical negligence claims. Among the NAO recommendations is a call for more and better data on maternity services in order to track trends, outcomes and experiences; and clinical commissioning groups should look at how services are delivered in their area and look to cooperate with neighbouring trusts to ensure all available resources are used efficiently. Last but not least, hospitals need to own up to mistakes at the outset and endeavour to give the families a full an explanation of what went wrong. It is the very least they can do and might even help to reduce the number of claims made against them.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
Friday, 13 June 2014
St Richard’s Hospital patient waits 12 hours for bed
A patient admitted to St Richard’s Hospital was left waiting for more than 12 hours for a bed – prompting an investigation.
The patient, who was told they needed to be admitted for further treatment, was being seen at the accident and emergency department of the Chichester hospital.
However, records show it took more than 12 hours before a bed could be found on a hospital ward.
National NHS targets say patients should be seen within four hours – which also includes treatment and a decision to discharge or admit them.
In the seven days leading up to April 27, ten patients admitted to St Richard’s and Worthing Hospital’s A&E departments were left waiting between four and 12 hours for a place on a ward. The figures were released in NHS England’s weekly report on A&E departments across the country.
Over the week-long period, the two departments, both run by Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, treated 2,624 patients.
In the week leading up to May 4, 13 patients were left waiting between four and 12 hours, but the hospitals treated 98.1 per cent of the 2,741 patients within four hours. The national average is 92.5 per cent.
Jane Farrell, chief operating officer and deputy chief executive at Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust, said: “This was an exceptionally busy period for the whole hospital and our partners across the health community and we are very sorry that one of our patients was not able to be transferred from A&E sooner.
“Such delays are incredibly rare and we have carried out a full investigation into what happened and shared the findings and recommendations with our staff.
“Our A&E departments, with support from teams across the hospital, are among the best-performing in the country.
“Almost 97 per cent of patients are seen, treated, admitted or discharged within the four-hour limit – well above the national average, which makes this case all the more disappointing.”
Queen Alexandra Hospital in Portsmouth has been fined £900,000 for not seeing patients in A&E quickly enough.
This article is courtesy from The Chichester News.
The patient, who was told they needed to be admitted for further treatment, was being seen at the accident and emergency department of the Chichester hospital.
However, records show it took more than 12 hours before a bed could be found on a hospital ward.
National NHS targets say patients should be seen within four hours – which also includes treatment and a decision to discharge or admit them.
In the seven days leading up to April 27, ten patients admitted to St Richard’s and Worthing Hospital’s A&E departments were left waiting between four and 12 hours for a place on a ward. The figures were released in NHS England’s weekly report on A&E departments across the country.
Over the week-long period, the two departments, both run by Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, treated 2,624 patients.
In the week leading up to May 4, 13 patients were left waiting between four and 12 hours, but the hospitals treated 98.1 per cent of the 2,741 patients within four hours. The national average is 92.5 per cent.
Jane Farrell, chief operating officer and deputy chief executive at Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust, said: “This was an exceptionally busy period for the whole hospital and our partners across the health community and we are very sorry that one of our patients was not able to be transferred from A&E sooner.
“Such delays are incredibly rare and we have carried out a full investigation into what happened and shared the findings and recommendations with our staff.
“Our A&E departments, with support from teams across the hospital, are among the best-performing in the country.
“Almost 97 per cent of patients are seen, treated, admitted or discharged within the four-hour limit – well above the national average, which makes this case all the more disappointing.”
Queen Alexandra Hospital in Portsmouth has been fined £900,000 for not seeing patients in A&E quickly enough.
This article is courtesy from The Chichester News.
Thursday, 12 June 2014
The family of a baby who died after hospital failings has won a five-figure pay-out
Daniel Kunigiskis died aged just four days after errors made at Warwick Hospital during the baby’s delivery in October 2012.
An inquest in June 2013 heard how Daniel suffered a lack of oxygen at birth, resulting in a severe brain injury. Following legal action, the family has now received a five-figure settlement and apology.
Speaking out for the first time about the case, mum Sarah, who lives in Warwick with her husband Tyron, said: “The death of Daniel has been so traumatic and that pain has been increased by the hospital taking such a long time to admit they were in the wrong.
“The hospital initially tried to imply that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery and would not admit they were at fault. During the labour I had a feeling things were going wrong, because I had given birth before, and I was saying ‘he’s not coming out, he’s not coming out’ and they were saying ‘oh no you are fine’.”
The inquest heard how three different midwives failed to read Sarah’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient, one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heartbeat properly.
Daniel was transferred from Warwick Hospital to Coventry’s University Hospital but sadly died on October 13. A consultant obstetrician indicated that if he had been aware of problems during Daniel’s birth he could have ensured delivery 45 minutes earlier – which would have meant Daniel would have survived.
“You put your faith in them getting it right and then they make these kind of catastrophic mistakes,” added Sarah.
“It’s then made worse when they won’t admit to it.
“By speaking out now about what happened to Daniel, I hope it can help to put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made. I hope it also raises awareness to individual patients to feel more confident in following their instincts in questioning the process when they believe that things are not right.
“It’s difficult to feel comfortable in making that challenge but I hope my case gives people the strength and courage to challenge those decisions.”
Sarah’s feelings of anger bubbled to the surface recently when her mum was admitted to the ward opposite the maternity ward at Warwick Hospital and was nervous about the care she would receive.
“Thankfully she received fantastic care and even the aftercare was excellent,” added Sarah.
Jeanette Whyman, Sarah’s solicitor and part of Leamington solicitors Wright Hassall’s clinical negligence team, said: “One of the most alarming and frustrating aspects of Sarah’s case was the length of time it took the hospital to admit their mistakes.
“The hospital refused to admit for a long time that the delay in delivery had resulted ultimately in Daniel’s death.
“They admitted there were issues with the birth but they didn’t say that had caused the terrible injuries Daniel suffered.
“There was a total refusal to admit to their negligence.’’
Helen Lancaster, director of nursing said: “At the inquest the Trust accepted that mistakes were made during the delivery of Daniel Kunigiskis, which we sincerely regret. I apologised to the family at the inquest. On behalf of the Trust I would like to apologise again and offer my condolences to Daniel’s family.”
An inquest in June 2013 heard how Daniel suffered a lack of oxygen at birth, resulting in a severe brain injury. Following legal action, the family has now received a five-figure settlement and apology.
Speaking out for the first time about the case, mum Sarah, who lives in Warwick with her husband Tyron, said: “The death of Daniel has been so traumatic and that pain has been increased by the hospital taking such a long time to admit they were in the wrong.
“The hospital initially tried to imply that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery and would not admit they were at fault. During the labour I had a feeling things were going wrong, because I had given birth before, and I was saying ‘he’s not coming out, he’s not coming out’ and they were saying ‘oh no you are fine’.”
The inquest heard how three different midwives failed to read Sarah’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient, one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heartbeat properly.
Daniel was transferred from Warwick Hospital to Coventry’s University Hospital but sadly died on October 13. A consultant obstetrician indicated that if he had been aware of problems during Daniel’s birth he could have ensured delivery 45 minutes earlier – which would have meant Daniel would have survived.
“You put your faith in them getting it right and then they make these kind of catastrophic mistakes,” added Sarah.
“It’s then made worse when they won’t admit to it.
“By speaking out now about what happened to Daniel, I hope it can help to put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made. I hope it also raises awareness to individual patients to feel more confident in following their instincts in questioning the process when they believe that things are not right.
“It’s difficult to feel comfortable in making that challenge but I hope my case gives people the strength and courage to challenge those decisions.”
Sarah’s feelings of anger bubbled to the surface recently when her mum was admitted to the ward opposite the maternity ward at Warwick Hospital and was nervous about the care she would receive.
“Thankfully she received fantastic care and even the aftercare was excellent,” added Sarah.
Jeanette Whyman, Sarah’s solicitor and part of Leamington solicitors Wright Hassall’s clinical negligence team, said: “One of the most alarming and frustrating aspects of Sarah’s case was the length of time it took the hospital to admit their mistakes.
“The hospital refused to admit for a long time that the delay in delivery had resulted ultimately in Daniel’s death.
“They admitted there were issues with the birth but they didn’t say that had caused the terrible injuries Daniel suffered.
“There was a total refusal to admit to their negligence.’’
Helen Lancaster, director of nursing said: “At the inquest the Trust accepted that mistakes were made during the delivery of Daniel Kunigiskis, which we sincerely regret. I apologised to the family at the inquest. On behalf of the Trust I would like to apologise again and offer my condolences to Daniel’s family.”
Wednesday, 11 June 2014
Queen Alexandra Hospital hit with more fines for waiting times in accident and emergency department
Accident and emergency waiting times have still not improved at Queen Alexandra Hospital despite months of work – and are costing the hospital hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The failure to get 90 per cent of patients either treated, admitted or discharged within the national guideline of four hours, has meant the hospital has incurred fines.
In the financial year ending in March, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (PHT), which runs QA, was given a £244,749 penalty for breaching this guideline – an increase on the previous year of £195,399.
This delay has had an impact on South Central Ambulance Service, which has also levied separate fines for keeping its crews waiting in A&E.
In 2012-13 the fine was £81,750, and in March this year it jumped up to £667,128.
PHT is largely funded by the Portsmouth, Fareham and Gosport, and South Eastern Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG), which issue the fines.
Dr Jim Hogan, chief clinical officer for the Portsmouth CCG, has said this is ‘disappointing’.
Speaking on behalf of all three CCGs, he said: ‘Achieving the four-hour target remains a big priority, so it’s disappointing all the efforts which have been made in recent months have yet to show a real improvement in terms of performance.
‘The Urgent Care Centre at QA is now well established and treating up to 30 patients a day at peak times, however that is clearly not the only answer.
‘The problem is complex and reaches far beyond A&E itself, but it’s clearly essential that patients can rely on an emergency care system which works well and is sustainable.
‘The three local CCGs, along with all the other elements of health and social care in this area, are committed to achieving that goal, and will continue to work on behalf of patients to ensure that urgent care waiting times come down.’
And Fareham MP Mark Hoban said more needs to be done to address the ‘huge gap’ in QA waiting times, compared to the national average.
Between January and March this year, 87.5 per cent of patients were seen within four hours – lower than the national average of 92.5 per cent. There was a minor improvement compared to this position last year, where 86 per cent of patients were seen in the time frame.
Mr Hoban said: ‘There’s still a huge gap in what the hospital trust is doing compared to the national average.
‘It’s disappointing to see A&E figures continue to lag, and we want to see a change.’
Steve Taylor, manager of patient forum Healthwatch Hampshire, said that it is aware of ongoing problems.
He said: ‘We know there are pressures. Clinically patients are satisfied, but the waiting times need to be addressed.’
QA has put in several measures to try to improve the situation in the last year. It has a new computer system, and has started placing GPs in A&E to get more patients seen. Ben Lloyd, financial director for PHT, said that the fines are largely put back into the trust.
He said: ‘Most of the money has been reinvested into the trust, and we are having ongoing discussions with our commissioners.
‘We need to get to the bottom of significant inaccuracies in ambulance fines imposed at the end of 2013-14.
‘For instance if there are four ambulances waiting with four patients, one crew has been told to stay and look after all four and the other three crews can be released. However, those have still been recorded as four ambulances waiting.
‘But we know the emergency department is getting full, and if we aren’t moving patients out, then new patients can’t get in.
‘We have put in significant programmes of improvements, staff work hard and changes have been made and we want to see improvements in the first quarter of this year.’
Ambulance trust is working with hospital
Fines can be issued by the NHS if ambulances are left waiting too long in hospital A&E departments.
In 2012/13, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs Queen Alexandra Hospital, was fined £81,750 by commissioners for ambulance hold-ups.
NHS guidelines state a patient coming into A&E ‘on blue lights’ should be transferred into the hospital’s care within 15 minutes.
If hospital trusts fail to meet that a penalty is issued.
Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG), which came into being in April last year, pay for health services to be provided.
QA is served by many CCGs – predominantly Portsmouth, Fareham & Gosport and South Eastern Hampshire.
For each delay over 30 minutes, CCGs can place a fine of £200, and more than an hour can mean a fine of £1,000.
In the last financial year PHT incurred a fine of £667,128 – a figure that is being looked at.
South Central Ambulance Service said it is working closely with PHT to improve the situation.
Operations director Mark Ainsworth said: ‘We have been working closely with the management team at QA to look at ways of reducing handover delays.
‘The increasing patient attendances at A&E reduces capacity in the department and the knock-on effect will be that at peak times ambulance crews are unable to get their patients into A&E.
‘Life-threatening patients are never delayed and are taken to a separate area in A&E for immediate treatment.
‘Patients who are unable to be admitted immediately into the emergency department are held in a queue and cared for by hospital and ambulance staff until capacity becomes available.
‘This means there is also an impact on Scas’s ability to respond to 999 calls awaiting our attendance in the community.
‘We will continue to work with QA to improve the processes we have implemented.’
Scas can charge commissioners £2.44 per minute for handover time longer than 15 minutes.
The failure to get 90 per cent of patients either treated, admitted or discharged within the national guideline of four hours, has meant the hospital has incurred fines.
In the financial year ending in March, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (PHT), which runs QA, was given a £244,749 penalty for breaching this guideline – an increase on the previous year of £195,399.
This delay has had an impact on South Central Ambulance Service, which has also levied separate fines for keeping its crews waiting in A&E.
In 2012-13 the fine was £81,750, and in March this year it jumped up to £667,128.
PHT is largely funded by the Portsmouth, Fareham and Gosport, and South Eastern Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG), which issue the fines.
Dr Jim Hogan, chief clinical officer for the Portsmouth CCG, has said this is ‘disappointing’.
Speaking on behalf of all three CCGs, he said: ‘Achieving the four-hour target remains a big priority, so it’s disappointing all the efforts which have been made in recent months have yet to show a real improvement in terms of performance.
‘The Urgent Care Centre at QA is now well established and treating up to 30 patients a day at peak times, however that is clearly not the only answer.
‘The problem is complex and reaches far beyond A&E itself, but it’s clearly essential that patients can rely on an emergency care system which works well and is sustainable.
‘The three local CCGs, along with all the other elements of health and social care in this area, are committed to achieving that goal, and will continue to work on behalf of patients to ensure that urgent care waiting times come down.’
And Fareham MP Mark Hoban said more needs to be done to address the ‘huge gap’ in QA waiting times, compared to the national average.
Between January and March this year, 87.5 per cent of patients were seen within four hours – lower than the national average of 92.5 per cent. There was a minor improvement compared to this position last year, where 86 per cent of patients were seen in the time frame.
Mr Hoban said: ‘There’s still a huge gap in what the hospital trust is doing compared to the national average.
‘It’s disappointing to see A&E figures continue to lag, and we want to see a change.’
Steve Taylor, manager of patient forum Healthwatch Hampshire, said that it is aware of ongoing problems.
He said: ‘We know there are pressures. Clinically patients are satisfied, but the waiting times need to be addressed.’
QA has put in several measures to try to improve the situation in the last year. It has a new computer system, and has started placing GPs in A&E to get more patients seen. Ben Lloyd, financial director for PHT, said that the fines are largely put back into the trust.
He said: ‘Most of the money has been reinvested into the trust, and we are having ongoing discussions with our commissioners.
‘We need to get to the bottom of significant inaccuracies in ambulance fines imposed at the end of 2013-14.
‘For instance if there are four ambulances waiting with four patients, one crew has been told to stay and look after all four and the other three crews can be released. However, those have still been recorded as four ambulances waiting.
‘But we know the emergency department is getting full, and if we aren’t moving patients out, then new patients can’t get in.
‘We have put in significant programmes of improvements, staff work hard and changes have been made and we want to see improvements in the first quarter of this year.’
Ambulance trust is working with hospital
Fines can be issued by the NHS if ambulances are left waiting too long in hospital A&E departments.
In 2012/13, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs Queen Alexandra Hospital, was fined £81,750 by commissioners for ambulance hold-ups.
NHS guidelines state a patient coming into A&E ‘on blue lights’ should be transferred into the hospital’s care within 15 minutes.
If hospital trusts fail to meet that a penalty is issued.
Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG), which came into being in April last year, pay for health services to be provided.
QA is served by many CCGs – predominantly Portsmouth, Fareham & Gosport and South Eastern Hampshire.
For each delay over 30 minutes, CCGs can place a fine of £200, and more than an hour can mean a fine of £1,000.
In the last financial year PHT incurred a fine of £667,128 – a figure that is being looked at.
South Central Ambulance Service said it is working closely with PHT to improve the situation.
Operations director Mark Ainsworth said: ‘We have been working closely with the management team at QA to look at ways of reducing handover delays.
‘The increasing patient attendances at A&E reduces capacity in the department and the knock-on effect will be that at peak times ambulance crews are unable to get their patients into A&E.
‘Life-threatening patients are never delayed and are taken to a separate area in A&E for immediate treatment.
‘Patients who are unable to be admitted immediately into the emergency department are held in a queue and cared for by hospital and ambulance staff until capacity becomes available.
‘This means there is also an impact on Scas’s ability to respond to 999 calls awaiting our attendance in the community.
‘We will continue to work with QA to improve the processes we have implemented.’
Scas can charge commissioners £2.44 per minute for handover time longer than 15 minutes.
This article is courtesy from Portsmouth.
Monday, 9 June 2014
West Midlands Ambulance Service fined £2.6 million over missed targets
The NHS in North Staffordshire has pocketed nearly £100,000 of a fine imposed for ambulance delays in other parts of the West Midlands.
The cash is part of £2.6million penalty on the region’s ambulance trust for failing to get to life-threatening calls quickly enough.
Over the whole of the West Midlands it missed a Government directive to reach 75 percent of 999s within eight minutes over the past year.
And even though it hit the target in North Staffordshire, £94,000 still comes to the area.
That is in recognition that ambulances could have been taken out of the county to cope with the hold-ups which built up in Birmingham districts.
Some will be paid back to improve ambulance response times with the rest available to spend on patient care by North Staffordshire’s two clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) which control NHS budgets.
Union leaders branded it “a farce” that money was being taken from a service already struggling to meet demand.
Latest figures show that despite the failings elsewhere, ambulances reached 76.5 percent of North Staffordshire emergencies within eight minutes last month to bring the average for the year to 81.1 percent.
CCGs’ finance director Tony Matthews said: “The delays are linked to the longer periods it was taking for ambulances to drop patients off at Birmingham hospitals and get back on the road again.
“In fact, at our own University Hospital of North Staffordshire, these turnaround times are among the shortest in the country.”
The service will lose £800,000 of the total fine because the remaining £1.8million will be reinvested to improve ambulance response times.
Leaders at West Midlands Ambulance Service(WMAS) say it has experienced unprecedented and unpredictable demand.
A spokesman said: “We were fined for failing to reach the Red 2 performance standard by just over one percent. To put this into perspective, we missed the target by, on average, only 12 seconds.
“There was no impact on patients from the levying of the fine as the trust board agreed to fund the £800,000 from reserves so that patient care was protected.
“We are currently exceeding all performance standards for 2014-15.”
The fine was technically imposed by Sandwell CCG which leads ambulance commissioning on behalf of all 17 groups in the West Midlands.
Ray Salmon, regional organiser for Unison ambulance union, said: “This is a farce. You cannot have 17 decisions made locally about an ambulance service which operates across the whole region.”
Ian Syme, co-ordinator of NHS campaigning group North Staffordshire Healthwatch, said: “Even though the problems appear to have been in Birmingham, ambulances may have been sent from Staffordshire to cover and that could have had a knock-on effect for UHNS.”
This article is courtesy from Stoke Sentinel.
The cash is part of £2.6million penalty on the region’s ambulance trust for failing to get to life-threatening calls quickly enough.
Over the whole of the West Midlands it missed a Government directive to reach 75 percent of 999s within eight minutes over the past year.
And even though it hit the target in North Staffordshire, £94,000 still comes to the area.
That is in recognition that ambulances could have been taken out of the county to cope with the hold-ups which built up in Birmingham districts.
Some will be paid back to improve ambulance response times with the rest available to spend on patient care by North Staffordshire’s two clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) which control NHS budgets.
Union leaders branded it “a farce” that money was being taken from a service already struggling to meet demand.
Latest figures show that despite the failings elsewhere, ambulances reached 76.5 percent of North Staffordshire emergencies within eight minutes last month to bring the average for the year to 81.1 percent.
CCGs’ finance director Tony Matthews said: “The delays are linked to the longer periods it was taking for ambulances to drop patients off at Birmingham hospitals and get back on the road again.
“In fact, at our own University Hospital of North Staffordshire, these turnaround times are among the shortest in the country.”
The service will lose £800,000 of the total fine because the remaining £1.8million will be reinvested to improve ambulance response times.
Leaders at West Midlands Ambulance Service(WMAS) say it has experienced unprecedented and unpredictable demand.
A spokesman said: “We were fined for failing to reach the Red 2 performance standard by just over one percent. To put this into perspective, we missed the target by, on average, only 12 seconds.
“There was no impact on patients from the levying of the fine as the trust board agreed to fund the £800,000 from reserves so that patient care was protected.
“We are currently exceeding all performance standards for 2014-15.”
The fine was technically imposed by Sandwell CCG which leads ambulance commissioning on behalf of all 17 groups in the West Midlands.
Ray Salmon, regional organiser for Unison ambulance union, said: “This is a farce. You cannot have 17 decisions made locally about an ambulance service which operates across the whole region.”
Ian Syme, co-ordinator of NHS campaigning group North Staffordshire Healthwatch, said: “Even though the problems appear to have been in Birmingham, ambulances may have been sent from Staffordshire to cover and that could have had a knock-on effect for UHNS.”
This article is courtesy from Stoke Sentinel.
Friday, 6 June 2014
New penalty cap could reduce total NHS bill
The study by software company Checklist calculated the potential size of this year’s fines by applying the new system of penalties and caps to trusts’ performance data for last year.
This showed that they would face less than £87m of fines in 2014-15 if the new rules and cap were applied. A similar study by Checklist in 2013 put the total penalties bill at £227m.
Checklist examined trust performance against targets for referral-to-treatment waits, 12-hour trolley waits, emergency admissions and cancelled operations, among others.
Trusts are likely to come under increasing pressure to hit performance targets in 2014-15. NHS England’s planning guidance for this year urged clinical commissioning groups to enforce penalties against trusts.
Checklist’s latest analysis could indicate that a £5,000 penalty for every patient waiting more than 52 weeks, which was introduced in April 2013, is beginning to take effect.
At the end of 2012 more than 1,000 patients had to wait more than 52 weeks for treatment after referral. By the end of 2013 this number had dropped to 317.
Anthony Thompson, a director at Checklist, said the 52-week fine would have a “huge effect”.
“If you’re a chief executive that’s a no-brainer to make sure that those patients do get treated.
“My sense is that the over 52 [weeks] waiter issue has largely gone away and the £5,000 fine has been quite effective.”
Under the new rules trusts are fined on a per patient basis for breaching the referral to treatment targets, rather than on the percentage of patients that have waited over the 18-week mark.
A 2.5% penalty cap on providers’ total monthly revenue has also been introduced.
Checklist’s analysis shows that this cap could significantly reduce the fines some trusts pay.
Barts Health Trust’s estimated uncapped fine of £8.3m would be reduced to £2.6m.
The “capped total” across all providers would be £86.7m, compared with an uncapped total of £117.8m.
A spokeswoman for NHS England urged caution in comparing the two sets of figures.
“Arrangements for 2014-15 have been made clearer and simpler and, because of these changes, it is difficult to directly compare the two,” she said.
“However, assuming there is no marked change in provider performance between the two years, our broad expectation is that overall sanctions imposed by commissioners will be no higher than in 2013-14 and, in some cases, providers that miss a standard by only a small margin in a particular period may face a lower sanction.”
A spokesman from Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, which faces the highest levels of fines according to the analysis, said it had significantly cut its backlog of patients who had waited 18 weeks for treatment.
This was achieved “with support from the Trust Development Authority and the NHS Intensive Support Team”, he added.
“We are on track to achieve the target, as agreed with the TDA, in June 2014.
“We have not had any patients waiting over 52 weeks for treatment since a single patient in September 2013, and we have significantly reduced our numbers of patients waiting over 40 weeks down to seven currently.”
This article is courtesy from LGC Plus.
This showed that they would face less than £87m of fines in 2014-15 if the new rules and cap were applied. A similar study by Checklist in 2013 put the total penalties bill at £227m.
Checklist examined trust performance against targets for referral-to-treatment waits, 12-hour trolley waits, emergency admissions and cancelled operations, among others.
Trusts are likely to come under increasing pressure to hit performance targets in 2014-15. NHS England’s planning guidance for this year urged clinical commissioning groups to enforce penalties against trusts.
Checklist’s latest analysis could indicate that a £5,000 penalty for every patient waiting more than 52 weeks, which was introduced in April 2013, is beginning to take effect.
At the end of 2012 more than 1,000 patients had to wait more than 52 weeks for treatment after referral. By the end of 2013 this number had dropped to 317.
Anthony Thompson, a director at Checklist, said the 52-week fine would have a “huge effect”.
“If you’re a chief executive that’s a no-brainer to make sure that those patients do get treated.
“My sense is that the over 52 [weeks] waiter issue has largely gone away and the £5,000 fine has been quite effective.”
Under the new rules trusts are fined on a per patient basis for breaching the referral to treatment targets, rather than on the percentage of patients that have waited over the 18-week mark.
A 2.5% penalty cap on providers’ total monthly revenue has also been introduced.
Checklist’s analysis shows that this cap could significantly reduce the fines some trusts pay.
Barts Health Trust’s estimated uncapped fine of £8.3m would be reduced to £2.6m.
The “capped total” across all providers would be £86.7m, compared with an uncapped total of £117.8m.
A spokeswoman for NHS England urged caution in comparing the two sets of figures.
“Arrangements for 2014-15 have been made clearer and simpler and, because of these changes, it is difficult to directly compare the two,” she said.
“However, assuming there is no marked change in provider performance between the two years, our broad expectation is that overall sanctions imposed by commissioners will be no higher than in 2013-14 and, in some cases, providers that miss a standard by only a small margin in a particular period may face a lower sanction.”
A spokesman from Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, which faces the highest levels of fines according to the analysis, said it had significantly cut its backlog of patients who had waited 18 weeks for treatment.
This was achieved “with support from the Trust Development Authority and the NHS Intensive Support Team”, he added.
“We are on track to achieve the target, as agreed with the TDA, in June 2014.
“We have not had any patients waiting over 52 weeks for treatment since a single patient in September 2013, and we have significantly reduced our numbers of patients waiting over 40 weeks down to seven currently.”
This article is courtesy from LGC Plus.
Wednesday, 4 June 2014
Mum sues hospital trust after son born with cerebral palsy
A mother is hoping she’ll get answers about her son’s birth by taking legal action against the health trust.
Alison dos Santos, of Cope Road, Banbury is suing Oxford UniversityHospitals NHS Trust (OUHT) for more than £300,000.
She says staff should have realised that her unborn baby was showing signs of distress, and should have fast-bleeped doctors.
She has accused the trust of clinical negligence and alleges that if her son Tiago was born “minutes earlier” or “completely resuscitated”, he would have been born unharmed.
But the child, now seven, suffered brain damage and was diagnosed with cerebral palsy when he was 10-months-old.
Although Tiago is bright he has restricted mobility, is confined to a wheelchair, and will need care for the rest of his life.
The family were dealt a second blow when Tiago’s 39-year-old father, Paulo Silva dos Santos, died in a road crash on the A415, near Ducklington, in 2006.
Tiago was just one at the time.
Ms dos Santos said: “Tiago is a beautiful boy with great potential. He has an inquisitive mind and a sense of adventure.
“This legal action will hopefully provide the answers to the many questions I have around what happened at his birth, as well as ensure that we can build a more positive future for Tiago, where we don’t have to rely on charity funding for essential equipment and therapy to unlock that potential.”
Mrs dos Santos, through her solicitor Dr Mala Sidebottom, of firm Leigh Day, is seeking unlimited damages of more than £300,000 for her son.According to the writ lodged at the High Court, Tiago was born at Banbury’s Horton Hospital on June 26, 2006, with the umbilical cord tied around his neck, he was not breathing and his face was blue.
Dr Sidebottom said: “This claim is being brought by Ms dos Santos in order that she might find the answers to what happened at Tiago’s birth as well as provide for his life-long care.
“Any compensation would be calculated to his exact needs and would be kept in a trust to provide peace of mind for his family that his life-long care needs would be provided for.
“These types of cases are relatively complex and can take a number of years.
“We believe that we are now in a position to assess what Tiago requires in the way of care for the rest of his life.”
A spokesman for OUHT said: “The trust can confirm that a High Court claim relating to a birth in 2006 has been filed against the trust.
“Because this is an ongoing legal claim, the trust is not in a position to comment further.”
Alison dos Santos, of Cope Road, Banbury is suing Oxford UniversityHospitals NHS Trust (OUHT) for more than £300,000.
She says staff should have realised that her unborn baby was showing signs of distress, and should have fast-bleeped doctors.
She has accused the trust of clinical negligence and alleges that if her son Tiago was born “minutes earlier” or “completely resuscitated”, he would have been born unharmed.
But the child, now seven, suffered brain damage and was diagnosed with cerebral palsy when he was 10-months-old.
Although Tiago is bright he has restricted mobility, is confined to a wheelchair, and will need care for the rest of his life.
The family were dealt a second blow when Tiago’s 39-year-old father, Paulo Silva dos Santos, died in a road crash on the A415, near Ducklington, in 2006.
Tiago was just one at the time.
Ms dos Santos said: “Tiago is a beautiful boy with great potential. He has an inquisitive mind and a sense of adventure.
“This legal action will hopefully provide the answers to the many questions I have around what happened at his birth, as well as ensure that we can build a more positive future for Tiago, where we don’t have to rely on charity funding for essential equipment and therapy to unlock that potential.”
Mrs dos Santos, through her solicitor Dr Mala Sidebottom, of firm Leigh Day, is seeking unlimited damages of more than £300,000 for her son.According to the writ lodged at the High Court, Tiago was born at Banbury’s Horton Hospital on June 26, 2006, with the umbilical cord tied around his neck, he was not breathing and his face was blue.
Dr Sidebottom said: “This claim is being brought by Ms dos Santos in order that she might find the answers to what happened at Tiago’s birth as well as provide for his life-long care.
“Any compensation would be calculated to his exact needs and would be kept in a trust to provide peace of mind for his family that his life-long care needs would be provided for.
“These types of cases are relatively complex and can take a number of years.
“We believe that we are now in a position to assess what Tiago requires in the way of care for the rest of his life.”
A spokesman for OUHT said: “The trust can confirm that a High Court claim relating to a birth in 2006 has been filed against the trust.
“Because this is an ongoing legal claim, the trust is not in a position to comment further.”
This article is courtesy from Banbury Cake.
Monday, 2 June 2014
'Doctors got my smear test results wrong - now I've got terminal cervical cancer’: Woman, 29, sues NHS for 'appalling mistakes' in her care
A young woman diagnosed with terminal cancer after hospital staff failed to spot abnormalities in a routine cervical smear test has criticised the ‘appalling mistakes’ made by the NHS.
Fay Harryman, 29, from Chatham, Kent, went for a routine cervical smear in April 2009.
The test was analysed at University Hospital Lewisham and she was told there were no abnormalities and should attend another routine smear test 36 months later.
However, within months she started suffering from bladder problems and abnormal bleeding.
Shockingly, she had an MRI scan in November 2010 which showed a large tumour on her cervix.
As a result, she had to have chemotherapy and radiotherapy which left her infertile.
But the treatment failed to stop the spread of the disease and she has now been told that it has spread to her lymph nodes and is incurable.
As a result, she is now undergoing treatment to prolong her life.
She said: ‘It’s very hard not to be bitter or angry as I now know that if my smear test had been correctly interpreted in 2009, the last five years would have been very different and I would probably have a future to look to now.
‘There have been numerous campaigns in my lifetime about the importance of attending regular smear tests and how early detection saves lives. When you follow these guidelines, you expect the NHS to correctly play its part in keeping you safe, but sadly my care fell well short of this.
‘Nothing can turn back the clock, but I feel that I deserve to know why it was possible for my smear test to be interpreted incorrectly and it would give me some small peace of mind to know that lessons have been learned throughout the NHS to prevent anyone else having to go through the same unnecessary nightmare as me.’
She said: ‘To be told at the age of 25 that cancer treatment has left you infertile is devastating enough, but to now be told treatment can only prolong my life rather than cure me is almost impossible to comprehend.
‘I had always wanted children but the first course of treatment led to me suffering a premature menopause.
‘My boyfriend Mike and I then planned to have children via a surrogacy route in America but I was rejected for funding on the NHS and now my cancer has returned it is not something I can continue to pursue.
‘My boyfriend and family have been amazing and I want to thank them for all the support they have provided.’
Ms Harryman has now instructed lawyers to investigate whether more could have been done to detect and treat her cancer sooner.
The firm is also investigating whether earlier detection would have saved her life.
Expert evidence commissioned by the lawyers found that Lewisham Healthcare NHS Trust failed to detect abnormal cells in the smear test taken in April 2009, incorrectly reported the smear as ‘normal’ and recommended a standard recall in 36 months (three years).
The evidence also suggests that, had the test been correctly reported as showing abnormalities, further testing would have been recommended within four weeks which, on the balance of probabilities, would have confirmed cancerous cells and meant Ms Harryman could have been sent for immediate treatment to remove them, preventing the cancer from spreading.
The Trust has admitted liability for the failure to detect and report the cancerous cells, but continues to dispute how the failures contributed to the cancer returning and whether it would have saved her life.
Ms Harryman’s legal team has now issued court proceedings in the hope of quickly securing her a vital settlement to fund her ongoing treatment costs and cover her loss of earnings.
Victoria Walne, her lawyer at the firm Irwin Mitchell, said: ‘This is a tragic case - Fay is not yet 30 but has been left with terminal cervical cancer and unable to have children.
‘While the Trust has admitted liability for its failings relating to interpreting and reporting the smear results, we believe it also needs to give answers about how it was possible for these failures to happen and confirm what steps have been taken to ensure the same, frankly appalling mistakes, can never happen again.
‘We hope the Trust will now work with us to provide this information to Fay but also quickly agree a settlement that will fund her ongoing care costs and cover her loss of earnings as she is unable to return to her previous job.’
A spokesperson of Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust said: ‘We are extremely sorry for the failure to detect abnormal cells following Fay Harryman’s smear test in 2009.
‘Whilst our processes for analysing and reporting smears met national guidelines, we did review them and have made improvements.
‘This includes ensuring that we carry out additional reviews of smear tests when necessary.
‘As legal proceedings are ongoing, we cannot comment further at this time.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Fay Harryman, 29, from Chatham, Kent, went for a routine cervical smear in April 2009.
The test was analysed at University Hospital Lewisham and she was told there were no abnormalities and should attend another routine smear test 36 months later.
However, within months she started suffering from bladder problems and abnormal bleeding.
Shockingly, she had an MRI scan in November 2010 which showed a large tumour on her cervix.
As a result, she had to have chemotherapy and radiotherapy which left her infertile.
But the treatment failed to stop the spread of the disease and she has now been told that it has spread to her lymph nodes and is incurable.
As a result, she is now undergoing treatment to prolong her life.
She said: ‘It’s very hard not to be bitter or angry as I now know that if my smear test had been correctly interpreted in 2009, the last five years would have been very different and I would probably have a future to look to now.
‘There have been numerous campaigns in my lifetime about the importance of attending regular smear tests and how early detection saves lives. When you follow these guidelines, you expect the NHS to correctly play its part in keeping you safe, but sadly my care fell well short of this.
‘Nothing can turn back the clock, but I feel that I deserve to know why it was possible for my smear test to be interpreted incorrectly and it would give me some small peace of mind to know that lessons have been learned throughout the NHS to prevent anyone else having to go through the same unnecessary nightmare as me.’
She said: ‘To be told at the age of 25 that cancer treatment has left you infertile is devastating enough, but to now be told treatment can only prolong my life rather than cure me is almost impossible to comprehend.
‘I had always wanted children but the first course of treatment led to me suffering a premature menopause.
‘My boyfriend Mike and I then planned to have children via a surrogacy route in America but I was rejected for funding on the NHS and now my cancer has returned it is not something I can continue to pursue.
‘My boyfriend and family have been amazing and I want to thank them for all the support they have provided.’
Ms Harryman has now instructed lawyers to investigate whether more could have been done to detect and treat her cancer sooner.
The firm is also investigating whether earlier detection would have saved her life.
Expert evidence commissioned by the lawyers found that Lewisham Healthcare NHS Trust failed to detect abnormal cells in the smear test taken in April 2009, incorrectly reported the smear as ‘normal’ and recommended a standard recall in 36 months (three years).
The evidence also suggests that, had the test been correctly reported as showing abnormalities, further testing would have been recommended within four weeks which, on the balance of probabilities, would have confirmed cancerous cells and meant Ms Harryman could have been sent for immediate treatment to remove them, preventing the cancer from spreading.
The Trust has admitted liability for the failure to detect and report the cancerous cells, but continues to dispute how the failures contributed to the cancer returning and whether it would have saved her life.
Ms Harryman’s legal team has now issued court proceedings in the hope of quickly securing her a vital settlement to fund her ongoing treatment costs and cover her loss of earnings.
Victoria Walne, her lawyer at the firm Irwin Mitchell, said: ‘This is a tragic case - Fay is not yet 30 but has been left with terminal cervical cancer and unable to have children.
‘While the Trust has admitted liability for its failings relating to interpreting and reporting the smear results, we believe it also needs to give answers about how it was possible for these failures to happen and confirm what steps have been taken to ensure the same, frankly appalling mistakes, can never happen again.
‘We hope the Trust will now work with us to provide this information to Fay but also quickly agree a settlement that will fund her ongoing care costs and cover her loss of earnings as she is unable to return to her previous job.’
A spokesperson of Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust said: ‘We are extremely sorry for the failure to detect abnormal cells following Fay Harryman’s smear test in 2009.
‘Whilst our processes for analysing and reporting smears met national guidelines, we did review them and have made improvements.
‘This includes ensuring that we carry out additional reviews of smear tests when necessary.
‘As legal proceedings are ongoing, we cannot comment further at this time.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)