A US jury awarded $813,000 this week to a woman whose foot was amputated following the wrong diagnosis by her physician.
It was the second time a jury heard Darlene Turner's medical malpractice suit against now-retired Dr. Nathan Stime. The first case, in 2008, was declared a mistrial because of juror misconduct.
The Spokesman-Review reported that Turner first went to Stime in 2004. She alleged that Stime failed to conduct an appropriate physical when he diagnosed her as having terminal cancer. She actually was suffering from pneumonia, which caused her to lapse into a coma and later resulted in the amputation of her left foot.
The jury awarded Turner damages for past and future medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering and for changes to her lifestyle.
This article is courtesy of The Olympian.
Regularly updated blog featuring news, articles and information relating to clinical/medical negligence.
Friday, 29 March 2013
Wednesday, 27 March 2013
What is responsible for the hike in clinical negligence claims?
It seems that the NHS is facing something of a medical negligence crisis at the moment. In February this year, the Francis Report published details of the failings of NHS managers at Mid Staffordshire Hospital, which led to between 400 and 1,200 deaths over five years.
According to the Medical Protection Society, legal claims against GPs have risen by 40% in 2012 alone, which is a staggering leap. They also stated that GPs are ‘more likely to be sued than ever before’. Clinical negligence solicitors appear to be having a field day with these statistics. This article attempts to get to the bottom of what is causing the spike in claims being made.
‘No win, no fee’
The Medical Defence Union is claiming that the availability of ‘no win, no fee’ solicitors has led to a rise in legal cases against doctors and healthcare officials, which has increased by 52%.
‘No win, no fee’ refers to a policy that medical negligence solicitors offer in the UK. Unless your case is successful, you will not have to pay out legal costs for the solicitor representing you.
This policy was introduced in response to Legal Aid not being available to certain patients who sought to right the wrongs done to them. This has proved to be highly popular and doctors are blaming these solicitors for the sharp rise in cases.
What else is causing the rise in cases?
Commentators are suggesting that patients are now becoming more litigious because of the options available to them with these kinds of solicitors. However, there are other factors involved in the rise in the number of cases, too.
One possible factor is that, due to the considerable strain on NHS resources, patient safety is being compromised. However, the head of claims for the MDU, Jill Harding, commented that this wasn’t the case.
She said, “The increase in claim numbers is not, we believe, driven by deteriorating standards of care, or a change in the underlying type of incidents that are giving rise to claims.”
Responses
In addition to the rise in the number of claims being made, the compensation value for most cases has skyrocketed. Given that the NHS’ expenditure on medical negligence cases rose by 45.9% from 2011 to 2012 to over £1 billion, there needs to be some kind of official response made.
As a result of these rises, the government has proposed changes to be implemented in April this year to lower the costs associated with such cases.
This article is courtesy of the Economic Voice.
According to the Medical Protection Society, legal claims against GPs have risen by 40% in 2012 alone, which is a staggering leap. They also stated that GPs are ‘more likely to be sued than ever before’. Clinical negligence solicitors appear to be having a field day with these statistics. This article attempts to get to the bottom of what is causing the spike in claims being made.
‘No win, no fee’
The Medical Defence Union is claiming that the availability of ‘no win, no fee’ solicitors has led to a rise in legal cases against doctors and healthcare officials, which has increased by 52%.
‘No win, no fee’ refers to a policy that medical negligence solicitors offer in the UK. Unless your case is successful, you will not have to pay out legal costs for the solicitor representing you.
This policy was introduced in response to Legal Aid not being available to certain patients who sought to right the wrongs done to them. This has proved to be highly popular and doctors are blaming these solicitors for the sharp rise in cases.
What else is causing the rise in cases?
Commentators are suggesting that patients are now becoming more litigious because of the options available to them with these kinds of solicitors. However, there are other factors involved in the rise in the number of cases, too.
One possible factor is that, due to the considerable strain on NHS resources, patient safety is being compromised. However, the head of claims for the MDU, Jill Harding, commented that this wasn’t the case.
She said, “The increase in claim numbers is not, we believe, driven by deteriorating standards of care, or a change in the underlying type of incidents that are giving rise to claims.”
Responses
In addition to the rise in the number of claims being made, the compensation value for most cases has skyrocketed. Given that the NHS’ expenditure on medical negligence cases rose by 45.9% from 2011 to 2012 to over £1 billion, there needs to be some kind of official response made.
As a result of these rises, the government has proposed changes to be implemented in April this year to lower the costs associated with such cases.
This article is courtesy of the Economic Voice.
Heart attack misdiagnosis is more common in women
At first, the woman assumed it was anxiety. She had a full-time job as a manager and was the mother of four kids who needed to be taken to multiple athletic events and appointments. But the chest pain, numbness in her arm, shortness of breath and other symptoms were not just a sign of her hectic life.
They were symptoms of a heart attack.
The woman was lucky. She called 911 and was taken to the hospital, where she received a proper diagnosis and treatment. Not all women share the same fate.
Misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis more common in women.
Women are more likely than men to suffer from a misdiagnosis of a heart attack or a delayed diagnosis of heart attack. According to the website hearthealthywomen.org, one study shows women younger than age 55 were seven times more likely to be misdiagnosed than men of the same age. Being sent from the hospital without being properly diagnosed doubled a patient's chance of dying.
In addition to misdiagnoses, women more frequently receive delayed treatment for heart attacks. According to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, a 2009 study of more than 5,800 people with heart attack symptoms who called 911 found that women were 52 percent more likely than men to be delayed in reaching the hospital after dialing 911. Delays can be deadly. Delays of 15 minutes have been shown to increase damage to the heart muscle, resulting in poorer outcomes.
Doctors and patients miss symptoms
Why the difference? According to hearthealthywomen.org, one possible reason is a myth. Heart disease is often thought of as a man's disease, but it is not. Heart disease killed 28,370 women in California in 2009. An average of 100 women die from heart attack and stroke in the state every day.
Doctors could miss the signs of heart attack in women simply because they are not expecting them. Women themselves are less likely than men to realize that their symptoms could be heart attack, and they are less likely to seek treatment right away.
Women's symptoms are often different and more subtle than the heart attack symptoms men experience. Although men and women may have crushing chest pressure, some women may have a heart attack without any.
According to the American Heart Association, they may have:
- Shortness of breath
- Pressure in the lower chest and upper abdomen
- Dizziness or lightheadedness
- Upper back pain
- Fatigue
iMinutes count, contact a lawyer if you have been harmed
Doctors and emergency departments have a responsibility to promptly diagnose and treat heart disease even when the symptoms are subtle. Minutes count. If you or a loved one has been harmed by a doctor's failure to diagnose you with heart attack, an experienced medical malpractice attorney can explain your options and evaluate your case.
This article is courtesy of the Digital Journal.
They were symptoms of a heart attack.
The woman was lucky. She called 911 and was taken to the hospital, where she received a proper diagnosis and treatment. Not all women share the same fate.
Misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis more common in women.
Women are more likely than men to suffer from a misdiagnosis of a heart attack or a delayed diagnosis of heart attack. According to the website hearthealthywomen.org, one study shows women younger than age 55 were seven times more likely to be misdiagnosed than men of the same age. Being sent from the hospital without being properly diagnosed doubled a patient's chance of dying.
In addition to misdiagnoses, women more frequently receive delayed treatment for heart attacks. According to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, a 2009 study of more than 5,800 people with heart attack symptoms who called 911 found that women were 52 percent more likely than men to be delayed in reaching the hospital after dialing 911. Delays can be deadly. Delays of 15 minutes have been shown to increase damage to the heart muscle, resulting in poorer outcomes.
Doctors and patients miss symptoms
Why the difference? According to hearthealthywomen.org, one possible reason is a myth. Heart disease is often thought of as a man's disease, but it is not. Heart disease killed 28,370 women in California in 2009. An average of 100 women die from heart attack and stroke in the state every day.
Doctors could miss the signs of heart attack in women simply because they are not expecting them. Women themselves are less likely than men to realize that their symptoms could be heart attack, and they are less likely to seek treatment right away.
Women's symptoms are often different and more subtle than the heart attack symptoms men experience. Although men and women may have crushing chest pressure, some women may have a heart attack without any.
According to the American Heart Association, they may have:
- Shortness of breath
- Pressure in the lower chest and upper abdomen
- Dizziness or lightheadedness
- Upper back pain
- Fatigue
iMinutes count, contact a lawyer if you have been harmed
Doctors and emergency departments have a responsibility to promptly diagnose and treat heart disease even when the symptoms are subtle. Minutes count. If you or a loved one has been harmed by a doctor's failure to diagnose you with heart attack, an experienced medical malpractice attorney can explain your options and evaluate your case.
This article is courtesy of the Digital Journal.
Tuesday, 26 March 2013
Jeremy Hunt announces NHS managers will be blacklisted for failure and patients will rate individual wards in major shake-up
Individual hospital wards will be rated by patients and negligent managers blacklisted from working in the NHS as part of sweeping reforms to prevent another Mid-Staffordshire style scandal, the Government has announced.
Under plans unveiled by the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt hospitals will be given Ofsted style ratings from next year – while patient satisfaction ratings for individual wards and units will also be published.
In addition the Government has signalled that it expects hospitals to employ more nurses to improve patient care and will tighten up the training and monitoring of healthcare assistants.
But it stepped back from plans to require a legal “duty of candour” for all NHS employees to expose wrong-doing saying it was concerned it could perversely lead to a new “culture of fear” in the organisation.
The Francis Inquiry into the lessons to be learnt from Mid Staffordshire also called for a new regulatory system for the NHS's army of healthcare assistants. But Mr Hunt only announced a code of practice and minimum training standards for the support staff, saying that a regulatory system could create a “bureaucratic quagmire”.
Hundreds of patients are thought to have died needlessly at Stafford Hospital between 2005 and 2009 after they were “routinely neglected”, given the wrong medication and left without food or water for days on end.
The Francis Inquiry into the scandal made 290 sweeping recommendations for healthcare regulators, providers and the Government.
Announcing its response yesterday Mr Hunt said the Government would:
• Appoint a new Chief Inspector of Hospitals who would be able to name and shame poorly performing trusts. Trusts that do not deliver adequate care to patients could be put into a “failure regime” and possibly into administration.
• Award hospitals Ofsted-style ratings including “outstanding”, “good“, “requiring improvement” or “poor”. Hospitals judged not to be providing compassionate care will be unable to achieve a “good” rating even if their medical outcomes are excellent.
• Move towards a system where all NHS staff are paid according to their current performance rather than time served.
• Ensure all nurses spend up to a year working as healthcare assistants as part of the degree courses.
Department of Health sources said under the new regime patients will be able to see not just how individual hospitals are performing but how well units within those hospitals do.
From next month all patients who visit A&E or who spend time on an acute ward will be asked to rate their care within 48 hours of discharge.
The feedback is expected to be published so other patients will be able to see how hospital services are rated before they have an operation.
In addition hospital managers who manipulate statistics or try and cover up cases of poor care will be “struck off” and banned from any future role in healthcare.
The Government is expected to set out details of how the new managerial barring scheme will work within the next few days.
Sources suggested that it might include managers at below board level but stressed that no final decision had yet been taken.
They added that it was being designed to ensure that there was a clear mechanism to ensure that failing managers did not get “shunted around the system”.
“In the past you’ve had managers who fabricated hospital waiting time figures turn up at a health authority or a primary care trust and there was nothing anyone could do to stop it.
“This is about bringing in a system to ensure that managers are held account for their failings and don’t just move around the NHS without any consequence.”
Mr Hunt conceded that as a result of the changes announced the NHS may have to recruit hundreds of extra nurses.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if many more nurses are employed,” Mr Hunt said.
Until now health chiefs have said that the reduction in nursing numbers was not affecting patient care.
But the campaign group set up in the wake of the Stafford Hospital scandal said the reforms did not go far enough.
Julie Bailey, head of Cure The NHS said the leadership and the “command and control type management” of the organisation had to change.
She told the BBC: “I sat through every day of that public inquiry, all the bodies failed, all the bodies had to apologise, and I really don't think that's been addressed in this statement.
“How many more reviews do we need to tell us the one thing that needs to change is the culture that needs to change? The very top, the people that rule the NHS, the leadership, that's what needs to change, and it works all the way down to the front line.”
Others also criticised the decision not to introduce a system of regulation for healthcare workers.
Jeremy Hughes, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Society said: “Real professional standards and registration for healthcare assistants does not constitute a box-ticking exercise and to suggest as such is a deeply disappointing compromise of patient safety for cost or convenience.”
The independent think tank the King's Fund also warned that the value of Ofsted-style ratings in hospitals was very limited.
“The value of aggregated ratings for hospitals is highly questionable,” said Chris Ham, its chief executive.
“These are complex organisations with different services and specialisms that may vary in quality so an overall rating can hide significant failings within a trust.”
This article is courtesy of The Independent.
Under plans unveiled by the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt hospitals will be given Ofsted style ratings from next year – while patient satisfaction ratings for individual wards and units will also be published.
In addition the Government has signalled that it expects hospitals to employ more nurses to improve patient care and will tighten up the training and monitoring of healthcare assistants.
But it stepped back from plans to require a legal “duty of candour” for all NHS employees to expose wrong-doing saying it was concerned it could perversely lead to a new “culture of fear” in the organisation.
The Francis Inquiry into the lessons to be learnt from Mid Staffordshire also called for a new regulatory system for the NHS's army of healthcare assistants. But Mr Hunt only announced a code of practice and minimum training standards for the support staff, saying that a regulatory system could create a “bureaucratic quagmire”.
Hundreds of patients are thought to have died needlessly at Stafford Hospital between 2005 and 2009 after they were “routinely neglected”, given the wrong medication and left without food or water for days on end.
The Francis Inquiry into the scandal made 290 sweeping recommendations for healthcare regulators, providers and the Government.
Announcing its response yesterday Mr Hunt said the Government would:
• Appoint a new Chief Inspector of Hospitals who would be able to name and shame poorly performing trusts. Trusts that do not deliver adequate care to patients could be put into a “failure regime” and possibly into administration.
• Award hospitals Ofsted-style ratings including “outstanding”, “good“, “requiring improvement” or “poor”. Hospitals judged not to be providing compassionate care will be unable to achieve a “good” rating even if their medical outcomes are excellent.
• Move towards a system where all NHS staff are paid according to their current performance rather than time served.
• Ensure all nurses spend up to a year working as healthcare assistants as part of the degree courses.
Department of Health sources said under the new regime patients will be able to see not just how individual hospitals are performing but how well units within those hospitals do.
From next month all patients who visit A&E or who spend time on an acute ward will be asked to rate their care within 48 hours of discharge.
The feedback is expected to be published so other patients will be able to see how hospital services are rated before they have an operation.
In addition hospital managers who manipulate statistics or try and cover up cases of poor care will be “struck off” and banned from any future role in healthcare.
The Government is expected to set out details of how the new managerial barring scheme will work within the next few days.
Sources suggested that it might include managers at below board level but stressed that no final decision had yet been taken.
They added that it was being designed to ensure that there was a clear mechanism to ensure that failing managers did not get “shunted around the system”.
“In the past you’ve had managers who fabricated hospital waiting time figures turn up at a health authority or a primary care trust and there was nothing anyone could do to stop it.
“This is about bringing in a system to ensure that managers are held account for their failings and don’t just move around the NHS without any consequence.”
Mr Hunt conceded that as a result of the changes announced the NHS may have to recruit hundreds of extra nurses.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if many more nurses are employed,” Mr Hunt said.
Until now health chiefs have said that the reduction in nursing numbers was not affecting patient care.
But the campaign group set up in the wake of the Stafford Hospital scandal said the reforms did not go far enough.
Julie Bailey, head of Cure The NHS said the leadership and the “command and control type management” of the organisation had to change.
She told the BBC: “I sat through every day of that public inquiry, all the bodies failed, all the bodies had to apologise, and I really don't think that's been addressed in this statement.
“How many more reviews do we need to tell us the one thing that needs to change is the culture that needs to change? The very top, the people that rule the NHS, the leadership, that's what needs to change, and it works all the way down to the front line.”
Others also criticised the decision not to introduce a system of regulation for healthcare workers.
Jeremy Hughes, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Society said: “Real professional standards and registration for healthcare assistants does not constitute a box-ticking exercise and to suggest as such is a deeply disappointing compromise of patient safety for cost or convenience.”
The independent think tank the King's Fund also warned that the value of Ofsted-style ratings in hospitals was very limited.
“The value of aggregated ratings for hospitals is highly questionable,” said Chris Ham, its chief executive.
“These are complex organisations with different services and specialisms that may vary in quality so an overall rating can hide significant failings within a trust.”
This article is courtesy of The Independent.
NHS care overhaul measures don't go far enough, say patient groups
Health secretary plans to name and shame failing hospitals and bar failing managers from the service after Mid Staffs scandal.
Failing hospitals will be named and shamed and NHS managers responsible for failures will be barred from working in the health service under government plans to ensure a Mid Staffs-style care scandal never happens again – but the health secretary's proposals were nevertheless criticised by patient groups for not going far enough.
Jeremy Hunt said on Tuesday he was laying the foundations for a culture "of zero harm and compassionate care" – but doubts surfaced over his failure to endorse post-Mid Staffs recommendations over minimum staffing levels in hospitals and whether NHS organisations would respond to a "duty of candour" to tell the truth when things go wrong.
The cabinet minister was responding to Robert Francis QC's report last month on the failings at Stafford hospital, part of the Mid Staffordshire NHS foundation trust, in 2005-2009, which contributed to the deaths of between 400 and 1,200 patients, mostly elderly.
The health secretary told MPs there had been "unacceptable and, in some cases, inhumane treatment" at Stafford, where there had been "a betrayal of the worst kind" of patients, their families and "the vast majority of NHS staff who do everything in their power to give their patients the high quality, compassionate care they deserve."
Dr Peter Carter, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing said that Hunt was wrong not to insist on specific levels of minimum staffing as recommended by Francis. He said greater numbers of staff result in better healthcare: "Simply leaving the setting of staffing levels to local discretion clearly isn't working and the time has come for mandatory, legally enforceable safe staffing levels."
Action against Medical Accidents (Avma), which has campaigned for years for a duty of candour, was concerned ministers had apparently not been convinced by the recommendation from Francis that individual NHS employees should be made liable for mistakes – and urged the Department of Health not to discount it.
But the department's 82-page response to Francis's 290 recommendations warned that there was a risk of "unintentionally create[ing] a culture of fear. This in turn could prevent lessons being learned and could make services less safe".
Peter Walsh, the chief executive of Avma, said Hunt's statement was "vague" – but welcomed the statutory duty on NHS organisations to tell the truth when patients have been harmed or killed as tougher measures would "help change the culture of cover-up and denial that has been eating away at the NHS like a cancer" and be "the biggest advance in patient safety and patients' rights in the history of the NHS.
A final decision on the proposal of personal accountability will not be made until later, subject to the findings of a review of patient safety in the NHS being conducted by Professor Don Berwick, a global expert in safe care who has advised President Barack Obama, who will report by July. Many medical organisations, including the British Medical Association, have expressed concern that such a move would deter staff from owning up to errors and open the NHS to a flood of new litigation.
Many of Hunt's proposals had been carefully trailed in the past few days. Failing hospitals would be monitored with a system of performance ratings based on Ofsted's existing assessments of schools in England. Meanwhile, managers responsible for failures will be barred from working elsewhere in the health service, while clauses gagging ex-NHS staff from raising concerns publicly will be banned.
Lisa Jordan, a medical lawyer at Irwin Mitchell, which has investigated over 50 cases of alleged negligence at Mid Staffs since 2005, said many patients would wonder why a zero-harm culture wasn't already in place. "Until ministers give their full response and put a detailed plan of action together responding to each of the 290 recommendations set out in the Francis reports, patients and their families will be left with questions unanswered as to how this could have happened in the first place and left waiting for the assurances they want that patient safety will never again be compromised to this extent," she said.
Welcoming the statutory duty of candour and penalties for executives who withheld important information, Jordan said questions remained "as to what will happen to less senior members of staff who are found to withhold information or cover up inexcusable mistakes".
Emma Jones, from the law firm Leigh Day, who represented over 120 victims of abuse at Stafford hospital in successful claims for compensation, called Hunt's measures "a small step in the right direction to keep the NHS true to its founding principles and the envy of the world." She said the duty of candour "needs to apply to individual hospital employees as well as the hospital itself. The majority of my clients complained about their treatment and care but either received a very bland or misleading response or no response at all."
But the NHS Employers organisation however was lukewarm about the new obligation. Dean Royles, its chief executive, said that while such a requirement "makes sense … we need to beware the law of unintended consequences. You don't improve culture by creating a climate of fear."
Francis said that although ministers had not accepted all his 290 recommendations, "the government's statement indicates its determination to make positive changes to the culture of the NHS, in part by adopting some of my recommendations and in part through other initiatives."
This article is courtesy of theguardian.
Failing hospitals will be named and shamed and NHS managers responsible for failures will be barred from working in the health service under government plans to ensure a Mid Staffs-style care scandal never happens again – but the health secretary's proposals were nevertheless criticised by patient groups for not going far enough.
Jeremy Hunt said on Tuesday he was laying the foundations for a culture "of zero harm and compassionate care" – but doubts surfaced over his failure to endorse post-Mid Staffs recommendations over minimum staffing levels in hospitals and whether NHS organisations would respond to a "duty of candour" to tell the truth when things go wrong.
The cabinet minister was responding to Robert Francis QC's report last month on the failings at Stafford hospital, part of the Mid Staffordshire NHS foundation trust, in 2005-2009, which contributed to the deaths of between 400 and 1,200 patients, mostly elderly.
The health secretary told MPs there had been "unacceptable and, in some cases, inhumane treatment" at Stafford, where there had been "a betrayal of the worst kind" of patients, their families and "the vast majority of NHS staff who do everything in their power to give their patients the high quality, compassionate care they deserve."
Dr Peter Carter, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing said that Hunt was wrong not to insist on specific levels of minimum staffing as recommended by Francis. He said greater numbers of staff result in better healthcare: "Simply leaving the setting of staffing levels to local discretion clearly isn't working and the time has come for mandatory, legally enforceable safe staffing levels."
Action against Medical Accidents (Avma), which has campaigned for years for a duty of candour, was concerned ministers had apparently not been convinced by the recommendation from Francis that individual NHS employees should be made liable for mistakes – and urged the Department of Health not to discount it.
But the department's 82-page response to Francis's 290 recommendations warned that there was a risk of "unintentionally create[ing] a culture of fear. This in turn could prevent lessons being learned and could make services less safe".
Peter Walsh, the chief executive of Avma, said Hunt's statement was "vague" – but welcomed the statutory duty on NHS organisations to tell the truth when patients have been harmed or killed as tougher measures would "help change the culture of cover-up and denial that has been eating away at the NHS like a cancer" and be "the biggest advance in patient safety and patients' rights in the history of the NHS.
A final decision on the proposal of personal accountability will not be made until later, subject to the findings of a review of patient safety in the NHS being conducted by Professor Don Berwick, a global expert in safe care who has advised President Barack Obama, who will report by July. Many medical organisations, including the British Medical Association, have expressed concern that such a move would deter staff from owning up to errors and open the NHS to a flood of new litigation.
Many of Hunt's proposals had been carefully trailed in the past few days. Failing hospitals would be monitored with a system of performance ratings based on Ofsted's existing assessments of schools in England. Meanwhile, managers responsible for failures will be barred from working elsewhere in the health service, while clauses gagging ex-NHS staff from raising concerns publicly will be banned.
Lisa Jordan, a medical lawyer at Irwin Mitchell, which has investigated over 50 cases of alleged negligence at Mid Staffs since 2005, said many patients would wonder why a zero-harm culture wasn't already in place. "Until ministers give their full response and put a detailed plan of action together responding to each of the 290 recommendations set out in the Francis reports, patients and their families will be left with questions unanswered as to how this could have happened in the first place and left waiting for the assurances they want that patient safety will never again be compromised to this extent," she said.
Welcoming the statutory duty of candour and penalties for executives who withheld important information, Jordan said questions remained "as to what will happen to less senior members of staff who are found to withhold information or cover up inexcusable mistakes".
Emma Jones, from the law firm Leigh Day, who represented over 120 victims of abuse at Stafford hospital in successful claims for compensation, called Hunt's measures "a small step in the right direction to keep the NHS true to its founding principles and the envy of the world." She said the duty of candour "needs to apply to individual hospital employees as well as the hospital itself. The majority of my clients complained about their treatment and care but either received a very bland or misleading response or no response at all."
But the NHS Employers organisation however was lukewarm about the new obligation. Dean Royles, its chief executive, said that while such a requirement "makes sense … we need to beware the law of unintended consequences. You don't improve culture by creating a climate of fear."
Francis said that although ministers had not accepted all his 290 recommendations, "the government's statement indicates its determination to make positive changes to the culture of the NHS, in part by adopting some of my recommendations and in part through other initiatives."
This article is courtesy of theguardian.
Monday, 25 March 2013
How prisoners have won £10 million in compensation in the past five years for negligence or injury
Compensation payments to prisoners have totalled more than £10 million in five years.
The staggering sum was paid out to inmates who claimed they were 'harmed' while behind bars.
Payments are made for medical negligence, accidents resulting in injury, or attacks by other prisoners.
Inmates can also claim per day payments for being kept in jail after the end of their sentence, as a result of administrative delays in letting them out.
The sum is on top of almost £60,000 a day on legal aid for inmates to help them claim compensation in the first place.
Thousands in legal aid can also be paid to those looking for softer punishments, or to demand release from their sentence.
Official Ministry of Justice figures showed a total of £10,125,845 in compensation over the last five financial years.
Last year it was nearly £1.6million, with one inmate receiving £125,000, and another £100,000 - both for medical negligence.
It is thought one of these payments was for a criminal at Brixton prison who fell out of his bunk and sued after suffering a brain injury.
Three prisoners were given £25,000 each for 'false imprisonment' - when they were kept inside despite their sentence ending.
A total of 22 offenders were handed sums of between £10,000 and £20,000. Thirty-one inmates received cheques of between £5,000 and £10,000.
Nearly 250 were paid smaller sums of between £1,000 and £5,000, many relating to delays in processing release papers, which can lead to prisoners spending too long behind bars.
In 2005 a prisoner was paid £2.8 million, reportedly to an inmate who required long-term medical care because of 'self-harm' committed in jail.
In a separate case, £1.14 million went to former prisoner Gregg Marston, of Shoeburyness, Essex, who was left crippled when a doctor failed to send him for an urgent examination.
His case, which was settled out of court, centred on his treatment at Chelmsford jail in Essex in February 2000.
He was taken there after failing to appear at court for driving offences committed in breach of the terms of his release from a four-year sentence for burglary.
Marston complained of back pain when he arrived at the jail but was not referred to hospital until the next day.
As part of his legal action, a consultant in spinal injuries told the Prison Service that, if Marston had been referred a day earlier, he might have undergone surgery to save the use of his legs.
The legal aid bill for prisoners' totalled £21.6million over the past two years - sparking fears of a flurry of human rights based complaints.
Inmates can demand lawyers to represent them at Parole Board hearings to insist they should be released, to fight disciplinary cases in prison or for complaining about conditions.
Among those claiming compensation is Soham killer Ian Huntley who wants up to £95,000 for being attacked in jail.
He said the Prison Service failed in its duty of care towards him after his throat was slashed by another inmate in March last year.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: 'The vast majority of prisoners' compensation claims are relatively trivial, do not merit financial redress, and are dismissed at an early stage.
'All claims are robustly defended, and would only be settled on the basis of strong legal advice, and in order to seek the best value for the taxpayer.
'Compensation would then be determined following judicial guidelines and a full analysis of the available evidence.'
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
The staggering sum was paid out to inmates who claimed they were 'harmed' while behind bars.
Payments are made for medical negligence, accidents resulting in injury, or attacks by other prisoners.
Inmates can also claim per day payments for being kept in jail after the end of their sentence, as a result of administrative delays in letting them out.
The sum is on top of almost £60,000 a day on legal aid for inmates to help them claim compensation in the first place.
Thousands in legal aid can also be paid to those looking for softer punishments, or to demand release from their sentence.
Official Ministry of Justice figures showed a total of £10,125,845 in compensation over the last five financial years.
Last year it was nearly £1.6million, with one inmate receiving £125,000, and another £100,000 - both for medical negligence.
It is thought one of these payments was for a criminal at Brixton prison who fell out of his bunk and sued after suffering a brain injury.
Three prisoners were given £25,000 each for 'false imprisonment' - when they were kept inside despite their sentence ending.
A total of 22 offenders were handed sums of between £10,000 and £20,000. Thirty-one inmates received cheques of between £5,000 and £10,000.
Nearly 250 were paid smaller sums of between £1,000 and £5,000, many relating to delays in processing release papers, which can lead to prisoners spending too long behind bars.
In 2005 a prisoner was paid £2.8 million, reportedly to an inmate who required long-term medical care because of 'self-harm' committed in jail.
In a separate case, £1.14 million went to former prisoner Gregg Marston, of Shoeburyness, Essex, who was left crippled when a doctor failed to send him for an urgent examination.
His case, which was settled out of court, centred on his treatment at Chelmsford jail in Essex in February 2000.
He was taken there after failing to appear at court for driving offences committed in breach of the terms of his release from a four-year sentence for burglary.
Marston complained of back pain when he arrived at the jail but was not referred to hospital until the next day.
As part of his legal action, a consultant in spinal injuries told the Prison Service that, if Marston had been referred a day earlier, he might have undergone surgery to save the use of his legs.
The legal aid bill for prisoners' totalled £21.6million over the past two years - sparking fears of a flurry of human rights based complaints.
Inmates can demand lawyers to represent them at Parole Board hearings to insist they should be released, to fight disciplinary cases in prison or for complaining about conditions.
Among those claiming compensation is Soham killer Ian Huntley who wants up to £95,000 for being attacked in jail.
He said the Prison Service failed in its duty of care towards him after his throat was slashed by another inmate in March last year.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: 'The vast majority of prisoners' compensation claims are relatively trivial, do not merit financial redress, and are dismissed at an early stage.
'All claims are robustly defended, and would only be settled on the basis of strong legal advice, and in order to seek the best value for the taxpayer.
'Compensation would then be determined following judicial guidelines and a full analysis of the available evidence.'
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Wednesday, 20 March 2013
Seven patients implanted with defective hip replacements at a US hospital are suing the HSE for damages.
Seven patients implanted with defective hip replacements at a US hospital are suing the HSE for damages.
It arises from the global recall of two devices by DePuy, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, in 2010.
The HSE has confirmed that 56 patients - both public and private - who had hip surgery at the Mid-Western Regional Orthopaedic Hospital in Croom were found to have had the implants concerned. And six patients – including referrals from outside the region – have had corrective surgery in Croom.
While DePuy has agreed to cover medical costs – including diagnostic tests and corrective surgery – and “out-of-pocket” expenses for travel and accommodation, it has not to date admitted liability as hundreds of Irish patients prepare to seek compensation in the courts.
Solicitor Peter McDonnell, an expert in medical negligence cases, is to host an information seminar on the DePuy recall at the Clarion Hotel this Wednesday (2pm). Patients, he said, deserved generous compensation from the company for ongoing medical complications and loss of earnings from reduced mobility.
The products concerned, he told the Leader, were marketed at relatively young patients and he had on his book many people formerly employed in construction who could “no longer earn a living”. Mr McDonnell said he was already representing up to 50 Limerick patients who had procedures in private hospitals in Cork, Waterford, Kilkenny and Tralee as well as a client who had the surgery done in Croom.
A spokesman for the HSE said around 3,500 of the implants were sold in Ireland.
“Figures from the UK have shown that up to 13% of patients with these implants have had to undergo a revision surgery within five years of their initial operation. Only a minority of patients who have had the DePuy ASR implant actually need further surgery. Fifty-six patients, public and private, operated on in Croom were identified as having the DePuy hip implant. There have been six revision surgeries and included in this figure are patients referred from other areas such as Cork and Waterford. Any correspondence received from solicitors in relation to ASR is copied to the State Claims Agency; currently there are seven claims,” the spokesman said
The Oireachtas health committee was told last year that the HSE had been named as defendants in about 100 DePuy hip cases.
Evidence was heard at the committee of ongoing pain and nerve and muscular damage suffered by the patients concerned. Patients have also expressed concern over the long-term effects - including possible organ damage - of cobalt and chromium leakage from DePuy products into the bloodstream.
Victims have been encouraged by that the company settled and compensated patients in the United States last year but there has been no admission of liability to date in Ireland.
Barrister Sara Antoniotti told the Oireachtas hearing last year she expected the company to mount a full defence.
This article is courtesy of Limerick Leader.
It arises from the global recall of two devices by DePuy, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, in 2010.
The HSE has confirmed that 56 patients - both public and private - who had hip surgery at the Mid-Western Regional Orthopaedic Hospital in Croom were found to have had the implants concerned. And six patients – including referrals from outside the region – have had corrective surgery in Croom.
While DePuy has agreed to cover medical costs – including diagnostic tests and corrective surgery – and “out-of-pocket” expenses for travel and accommodation, it has not to date admitted liability as hundreds of Irish patients prepare to seek compensation in the courts.
Solicitor Peter McDonnell, an expert in medical negligence cases, is to host an information seminar on the DePuy recall at the Clarion Hotel this Wednesday (2pm). Patients, he said, deserved generous compensation from the company for ongoing medical complications and loss of earnings from reduced mobility.
The products concerned, he told the Leader, were marketed at relatively young patients and he had on his book many people formerly employed in construction who could “no longer earn a living”. Mr McDonnell said he was already representing up to 50 Limerick patients who had procedures in private hospitals in Cork, Waterford, Kilkenny and Tralee as well as a client who had the surgery done in Croom.
A spokesman for the HSE said around 3,500 of the implants were sold in Ireland.
“Figures from the UK have shown that up to 13% of patients with these implants have had to undergo a revision surgery within five years of their initial operation. Only a minority of patients who have had the DePuy ASR implant actually need further surgery. Fifty-six patients, public and private, operated on in Croom were identified as having the DePuy hip implant. There have been six revision surgeries and included in this figure are patients referred from other areas such as Cork and Waterford. Any correspondence received from solicitors in relation to ASR is copied to the State Claims Agency; currently there are seven claims,” the spokesman said
The Oireachtas health committee was told last year that the HSE had been named as defendants in about 100 DePuy hip cases.
Evidence was heard at the committee of ongoing pain and nerve and muscular damage suffered by the patients concerned. Patients have also expressed concern over the long-term effects - including possible organ damage - of cobalt and chromium leakage from DePuy products into the bloodstream.
Victims have been encouraged by that the company settled and compensated patients in the United States last year but there has been no admission of liability to date in Ireland.
Barrister Sara Antoniotti told the Oireachtas hearing last year she expected the company to mount a full defence.
This article is courtesy of Limerick Leader.
£7.3m payout for brain-damaged boy from Hertfordshire
A boy from Hertfordshire who suffered brain damage after heart surgery in 1999 is to receive £7.3m compensation.
Robbie Crane, who is now 13, won an out-of-court settlement for a claim of alleged medical negligence against Harefield Hospital in Middlesex.
The Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust denied liability.
Robbie's parents said the settlement, which was given final approval on Wednesday, would allow the family to "plan for the future with confidence".
Their son was born with transposition of the great arteries.
He was admitted to Harefield Hospital for the defect to be corrected in October 1999, when he was a few days old.
The surgery was successful but a legal claim was brought relating to alleged negligent treatment during a period of ventilation afterwards.
Robbie, who now has cerebral palsy, learning difficulties, limited speech and behavioural problems including no sense of danger, will need specially-adapted accommodation and round-the-clock care for the rest of his life.
In 2011, the High Court heard that settlement in the case had been reached with the Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust on the basis that it would pay 70% of the full value of the claim.
On Wednesday, Mr Justice Tugendhat, approving the settlement, paid tribute to the devotion shown by Robbie's parents, Catherine and Barrie.
Neil Block QC, for the trust, said that although no admission was made as to breach of duty, he wished to apologise to the family and hoped that one huge worry had been lifted from their shoulders now Robbie was financially secure.
After the hearing in London, Mr and Mrs Crane said: "This brings to an end a long and challenging legal process but the daily care that Robbie requires will continue for the rest of his life.
"We were repeatedly told that there was no chance of securing compensation but our legal team urged us on and so it is a great relief to finally have it decided."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Robbie Crane, who is now 13, won an out-of-court settlement for a claim of alleged medical negligence against Harefield Hospital in Middlesex.
The Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust denied liability.
Robbie's parents said the settlement, which was given final approval on Wednesday, would allow the family to "plan for the future with confidence".
We were repeatedly told that there was no chance of securing compensation”
Catherine and Barrie Crane
Their son was born with transposition of the great arteries.
He was admitted to Harefield Hospital for the defect to be corrected in October 1999, when he was a few days old.
The surgery was successful but a legal claim was brought relating to alleged negligent treatment during a period of ventilation afterwards.
Robbie, who now has cerebral palsy, learning difficulties, limited speech and behavioural problems including no sense of danger, will need specially-adapted accommodation and round-the-clock care for the rest of his life.
In 2011, the High Court heard that settlement in the case had been reached with the Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust on the basis that it would pay 70% of the full value of the claim.
On Wednesday, Mr Justice Tugendhat, approving the settlement, paid tribute to the devotion shown by Robbie's parents, Catherine and Barrie.
Neil Block QC, for the trust, said that although no admission was made as to breach of duty, he wished to apologise to the family and hoped that one huge worry had been lifted from their shoulders now Robbie was financially secure.
After the hearing in London, Mr and Mrs Crane said: "This brings to an end a long and challenging legal process but the daily care that Robbie requires will continue for the rest of his life.
"We were repeatedly told that there was no chance of securing compensation but our legal team urged us on and so it is a great relief to finally have it decided."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Monday, 18 March 2013
Wake up call: Reforming medical resident duty hours
When Libby Zion, an 18-year old college freshman was rushed to New
York Hospital on the night of October 4, 1984, she had a fever, chills
and mysterious jerking symptoms. Following admission to the hospital,
she was evaluated by two medical residents, who were unsure what exactly
was wrong with her. They prescribed her meperidine, a sedative, and
left to take care of the other 40 patients that they were assigned to.
Later that night, Libby's temperature shot up to 107 degrees. Despite
her deteriorating condition, she was never evaluated by the attending
physician. She died of a cardiac arrest that night.
When Libby's father investigated his daughter's death, he found that the two residents who evaluated her had been on call for nearly 24 hours, and that many residents routinely worked up to 36 hour shifts. Their sleep-deprivation may have led them to miss the fact that the medication they prescribed Libby, meperidine, had known interactions with another medication she was taking, and might have contributed to her decline. Her father eventually sued the hospital for wrongful death, setting off a national debate on medical resident work hours and supervision that has lasted for almost 30 years.
Over the past several decades, a growing body of medical literature has suggested that sleep deprivation from working long hours in the hospital can lead to serious mistakes. One study found that surgical residents who had been up all night committed 20 percent more errors and took 14% longer to complete a surgical task than those who had gotten sleep the night before. Another found that the deterioration in hand-eye coordination after being up for 28 hours was similar to having a BAC of 0.1 percent (25 percent above the legal driving limit). In response to this research, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) proposed new guidelines last year that require first-year medical students to work a maximum of 80 hours a week, with shifts lasting no longer than 16 hours. This represents a drastic change to the regulations in place prior to July 2011, under which residents worked up to 30 hours in a single shift. With preventable medical errors raking $1 trillion in losses on the US healthcare system, the ACGME hoped that these new resident duty hour regulations would reduce medical errors while improving patient care and enhancing resident quality of life.
Unfortunately, a recent survey published in the New England Journal of Medicine suggests that these duty hour regulations have had little practical effect. The authors surveyed 6202 residents in 123 residency programs in 41 states, and found that overall, many areas that the new ACGME regulations had targeted for improvement remained unchanged. A majority of residents reported no change in the amount of rest they obtained (50.1 percent) and the total number of hours worked (58.9 percent), and a substantial portion reported a worsening of their work schedules (43.0 percent) and a decrease in the quality of their education (40.9 percent). In addition, senior residents reported a decrease in quality of life (49.7 percent), perhaps due to the shift of workload from first-year residents to more senior residents. Overall, more than twice as many residents surveyed disapproved of the regulations compared to those who approved of them (48.4 percent vs 22.9 percent).
Given these data, it is clear that greater reform is needed. Measures should be put into place that effectively ensure residents are getting enough sleep, and that their work schedules and quality of life are improving, rather than deteriorating under the new guidelines. Moreover, patient safety should always be at the forefront of the regulations to ensure that preventable medical errors are caught before they cause serious harm. Enforcing measures that incentivize the achievement of these goals will enhance both patient and physician quality of life.
This article is courtesy of The Huffington Post.
When Libby's father investigated his daughter's death, he found that the two residents who evaluated her had been on call for nearly 24 hours, and that many residents routinely worked up to 36 hour shifts. Their sleep-deprivation may have led them to miss the fact that the medication they prescribed Libby, meperidine, had known interactions with another medication she was taking, and might have contributed to her decline. Her father eventually sued the hospital for wrongful death, setting off a national debate on medical resident work hours and supervision that has lasted for almost 30 years.
Over the past several decades, a growing body of medical literature has suggested that sleep deprivation from working long hours in the hospital can lead to serious mistakes. One study found that surgical residents who had been up all night committed 20 percent more errors and took 14% longer to complete a surgical task than those who had gotten sleep the night before. Another found that the deterioration in hand-eye coordination after being up for 28 hours was similar to having a BAC of 0.1 percent (25 percent above the legal driving limit). In response to this research, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) proposed new guidelines last year that require first-year medical students to work a maximum of 80 hours a week, with shifts lasting no longer than 16 hours. This represents a drastic change to the regulations in place prior to July 2011, under which residents worked up to 30 hours in a single shift. With preventable medical errors raking $1 trillion in losses on the US healthcare system, the ACGME hoped that these new resident duty hour regulations would reduce medical errors while improving patient care and enhancing resident quality of life.
Unfortunately, a recent survey published in the New England Journal of Medicine suggests that these duty hour regulations have had little practical effect. The authors surveyed 6202 residents in 123 residency programs in 41 states, and found that overall, many areas that the new ACGME regulations had targeted for improvement remained unchanged. A majority of residents reported no change in the amount of rest they obtained (50.1 percent) and the total number of hours worked (58.9 percent), and a substantial portion reported a worsening of their work schedules (43.0 percent) and a decrease in the quality of their education (40.9 percent). In addition, senior residents reported a decrease in quality of life (49.7 percent), perhaps due to the shift of workload from first-year residents to more senior residents. Overall, more than twice as many residents surveyed disapproved of the regulations compared to those who approved of them (48.4 percent vs 22.9 percent).
Given these data, it is clear that greater reform is needed. Measures should be put into place that effectively ensure residents are getting enough sleep, and that their work schedules and quality of life are improving, rather than deteriorating under the new guidelines. Moreover, patient safety should always be at the forefront of the regulations to ensure that preventable medical errors are caught before they cause serious harm. Enforcing measures that incentivize the achievement of these goals will enhance both patient and physician quality of life.
This article is courtesy of The Huffington Post.
Sunday, 17 March 2013
Anguish of couple who lost IVF twins after death of son, 16, because of medical failings
After losing their only son Josh at the age of 16, Ian and Nikki Singleton were desperate to build a family again.
They went through 13 bouts of IVF before Mrs Singleton became pregnant again – this time with twins.
But an inquest yesterday heard how the birth turned to tragedy following a string of medical failings.
Mrs Singleton was rushed to hospital suffering from severe stomach pain just 30 weeks into her pregnancy.
After being transferred to another hospital and enduring an agonising wait to be treated her baby boy Reuben was stillborn and his twin sister Esme died the following day.
The hearing found medics had failed to spot Mrs Singleton, 49, had suffered a rupture to her uterus when she arrived at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital near Cardiff in July 2009.
Her condition worsened as she waited two hours for a Caesarean section that resulted in Reuben being stillborn and Esme showing no signs of life.
After 22 minutes of resuscitation Esme began breathing again but she had suffered such severe brain damage that the Singletons – who lost their son Josh to a brain haemorrhage – agreed to turn off her life support machine the next day.
Aberdare Coroner’s Court heard midwives had ignored the warning signs of Mrs Singleton’s condition despite the fact she was in severe pain.
Consultant gynaecologist Hatel Tejura said the lack of uterine activity and a foetal heartbeat should have sent alarm bells ringing then.
The inquest was being held into the death of Esme only because there are no inquests into the deaths of stillborn children.
It heard that when Mrs Singleton arrived at the Royal Glamorgan a midwife could only detect one heartbeat instead of the two there should have been.
But at this point at 12.40pm medics believed she was in premature labour and had not diagnosed a ruptured uterus.
There was then a two hour delay before a Caesarean section was performed in which time Esme is believed to have suffered severe brain damage.
Glamorgan coroner Louise Hunt recorded a narrative verdict saying: ‘Esme was well at 12.40pm – it is most likely there was a critical event then with things changing radically but not being appreciated by the medical staff. They have acknowledged that today.
‘Because it was not appreciated that she was in serious difficulties there was a considerable delay in doing a Caesarean section.
Esme was not delivered for two hours – more than enough for the damage to have been done.
‘She died from brain damage caused by the rupture which went undiagnosed in labour resulting in delay in the delivery.’
The inquest heard the local Cwm Taff Health Board had accepted failing in their standard of care and offered its apologies to the Singletons who were living near Cardiff at the time.
After the hearing Mrs Singleton, who now lives in Swindon, Wiltshire said: ‘This happened three years ago but the pain is still there and will never, ever go away.’
Her husband, 50, said: ‘We feel that Esme’s death was a mixture of incompetence, negligence and a cavalier attitude.’
The couple are pursuing a legal case against the hospital for negligence.
This article is courtesy the Daily Mail.
They went through 13 bouts of IVF before Mrs Singleton became pregnant again – this time with twins.
But an inquest yesterday heard how the birth turned to tragedy following a string of medical failings.
Mrs Singleton was rushed to hospital suffering from severe stomach pain just 30 weeks into her pregnancy.
After being transferred to another hospital and enduring an agonising wait to be treated her baby boy Reuben was stillborn and his twin sister Esme died the following day.
The hearing found medics had failed to spot Mrs Singleton, 49, had suffered a rupture to her uterus when she arrived at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital near Cardiff in July 2009.
Her condition worsened as she waited two hours for a Caesarean section that resulted in Reuben being stillborn and Esme showing no signs of life.
After 22 minutes of resuscitation Esme began breathing again but she had suffered such severe brain damage that the Singletons – who lost their son Josh to a brain haemorrhage – agreed to turn off her life support machine the next day.
Aberdare Coroner’s Court heard midwives had ignored the warning signs of Mrs Singleton’s condition despite the fact she was in severe pain.
Consultant gynaecologist Hatel Tejura said the lack of uterine activity and a foetal heartbeat should have sent alarm bells ringing then.
The inquest was being held into the death of Esme only because there are no inquests into the deaths of stillborn children.
It heard that when Mrs Singleton arrived at the Royal Glamorgan a midwife could only detect one heartbeat instead of the two there should have been.
But at this point at 12.40pm medics believed she was in premature labour and had not diagnosed a ruptured uterus.
There was then a two hour delay before a Caesarean section was performed in which time Esme is believed to have suffered severe brain damage.
Glamorgan coroner Louise Hunt recorded a narrative verdict saying: ‘Esme was well at 12.40pm – it is most likely there was a critical event then with things changing radically but not being appreciated by the medical staff. They have acknowledged that today.
‘Because it was not appreciated that she was in serious difficulties there was a considerable delay in doing a Caesarean section.
Esme was not delivered for two hours – more than enough for the damage to have been done.
‘She died from brain damage caused by the rupture which went undiagnosed in labour resulting in delay in the delivery.’
The inquest heard the local Cwm Taff Health Board had accepted failing in their standard of care and offered its apologies to the Singletons who were living near Cardiff at the time.
After the hearing Mrs Singleton, who now lives in Swindon, Wiltshire said: ‘This happened three years ago but the pain is still there and will never, ever go away.’
Her husband, 50, said: ‘We feel that Esme’s death was a mixture of incompetence, negligence and a cavalier attitude.’
The couple are pursuing a legal case against the hospital for negligence.
This article is courtesy the Daily Mail.
Cosmetic surgery cowboys: I caught flesh-eating bug during breast operation, and was refused compensation from foreign surgeon
When Bernadette Cini decided to have a breast reduction after years of deliberation, she opted for a surgeon at the Harley Medical Group – a prestigious, reputable firm. Or so she thought.
Her G-cup breasts caused significant back pain and she may have qualified for NHS treatment but chose to go private for this highly complex operation.
‘I wanted the best possible result,’ says the 62-year-old.
‘The surgeon Hicham Mouallem assured me he used a technique that minimised scarring and retained sensitivity to the nipples, which could be lost. So I decided to go ahead.’
It was a decision she would bitterly regret. In the days after her £5,700 surgery in 2006, the mother of two from Croydon, Surrey, developed a rampant infection in her breasts.
It was ‘flesh-eating’ necrosis, caused by pseudomonas, bacteria normally found in soil.
Over the course of a year, she had five operations to cut away diseased tissue and repair her breasts.
The constant agony she was in meant Bernadette was unable to go on working as a nanny and eventually had to give up her job completely.
‘Everything became a horrible blur of hospitals, operations and pain,’ she recalls.
But when Bernadette sought compensation, Harley Medical Group claimed they were only ‘agents’ so not responsible, and that the surgeon had returned to Italy.
Mouallem was a ‘Fifo’ – a ‘fly in, fly out’ foreign surgeon – and had no insurance in the UK. Although all doctors treating patients in Britain must be registered by law with the GMC, they do not have to have insurance in this country.
There are no official figures on the number of Fifos operating in the UK, but the last estimate, from a report by the then Healthcare Commission in 2005, stated that two-thirds of surgeons may be from abroad. If they are uninsured, patients who suffer horrific complications struggle to obtain compensation.
It took Bernadette months to track down Mouallem and two years to build a case against him. He admitted he had not warned Bernadette of her heightened risk of infection, due to her weight, and agreed to pay her £20,000 in an out-of-court settlement, barely enough to cover her lost earnings.
Recalling the initial operation at the Highgate Hospital, Bernadette says she first noticed something was not quite right when she woke up after surgery. A drain inserted into her newly-reduced left breast to remove excess fluid was not working.
Mouallem checked Bernadette that evening. She recalls: ‘He just squeezed the suction bag adding, “It’s OK,” and then left.
‘The next day when he returned and saw the drain was still not working he squeezed my breast with his hand, until fluid seemed to move into the drain.’ The next day, a different doctor discharged Bernadette and she went home.
She continues: ‘At first I put my discomfort down to the fact I’d had surgery. Two days later, though, my breast was feeling really tight and painful. I returned to the clinic, where I already had an appointment for a routine dressing change. By the time I went in, my breast felt like it was going to burst and was clearly very infected.
‘The nurse told us she had never seen anything like it before and that I needed to see the surgeon.
‘When he saw it, he started to try to syringe it while pushing down on the breast with the other hand. I was in agony.
‘He didn’t have gloves on and kept telling the nurse “get her to turn away” and “keep her quiet”, because I was screaming.’
A new dressing was applied and she was sent home.
A couple of days later she was again in pain and feeling extremely weak. When her partner contacted the clinic, Bernadette was amazed to discover Mouallem was no longer in the UK.
She was sent to see another Harley Medical Group surgeon, who delivered the devastating news that she had a severe infection and arranged for re-admission to the Highgate.
Bernadette was given antibiotics but the bug spread into the other breast. ‘It was horrifying. There was so much discharge that it would weep through a new dressing and eventually I had to re-do the dressing myself.’
For the next six weeks she was in and out of the hospital but nothing stopped the infection. It was only after she demanded a meeting with the hospital director that she was referred to another specialist, Charles Nduka.
‘He was brilliant, but he had to cut a huge amount of tissue out in order to stop the infection. I’m lucky that I still look relatively normal, with a small scar underneath both breasts.
‘I had hoped that having a breast reduction would allow me to start doing more exercise and get slim. But being so ill and immobile led me to put on weight. Mouallem treated me like something on a conveyor belt.’
Mouallem, who now claims to have UK insurance, said earlier this year: ‘She was a fat lady. She had an infection, it was from the hospital, not from me. The blame gets put on me because it is easier for the company. It wasn’t like she was dying, it was an infection. It can happen with any surgery.’
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Her G-cup breasts caused significant back pain and she may have qualified for NHS treatment but chose to go private for this highly complex operation.
‘I wanted the best possible result,’ says the 62-year-old.
‘The surgeon Hicham Mouallem assured me he used a technique that minimised scarring and retained sensitivity to the nipples, which could be lost. So I decided to go ahead.’
It was a decision she would bitterly regret. In the days after her £5,700 surgery in 2006, the mother of two from Croydon, Surrey, developed a rampant infection in her breasts.
It was ‘flesh-eating’ necrosis, caused by pseudomonas, bacteria normally found in soil.
Over the course of a year, she had five operations to cut away diseased tissue and repair her breasts.
The constant agony she was in meant Bernadette was unable to go on working as a nanny and eventually had to give up her job completely.
‘Everything became a horrible blur of hospitals, operations and pain,’ she recalls.
But when Bernadette sought compensation, Harley Medical Group claimed they were only ‘agents’ so not responsible, and that the surgeon had returned to Italy.
Mouallem was a ‘Fifo’ – a ‘fly in, fly out’ foreign surgeon – and had no insurance in the UK. Although all doctors treating patients in Britain must be registered by law with the GMC, they do not have to have insurance in this country.
There are no official figures on the number of Fifos operating in the UK, but the last estimate, from a report by the then Healthcare Commission in 2005, stated that two-thirds of surgeons may be from abroad. If they are uninsured, patients who suffer horrific complications struggle to obtain compensation.
It took Bernadette months to track down Mouallem and two years to build a case against him. He admitted he had not warned Bernadette of her heightened risk of infection, due to her weight, and agreed to pay her £20,000 in an out-of-court settlement, barely enough to cover her lost earnings.
Recalling the initial operation at the Highgate Hospital, Bernadette says she first noticed something was not quite right when she woke up after surgery. A drain inserted into her newly-reduced left breast to remove excess fluid was not working.
Mouallem checked Bernadette that evening. She recalls: ‘He just squeezed the suction bag adding, “It’s OK,” and then left.
‘The next day when he returned and saw the drain was still not working he squeezed my breast with his hand, until fluid seemed to move into the drain.’ The next day, a different doctor discharged Bernadette and she went home.
She continues: ‘At first I put my discomfort down to the fact I’d had surgery. Two days later, though, my breast was feeling really tight and painful. I returned to the clinic, where I already had an appointment for a routine dressing change. By the time I went in, my breast felt like it was going to burst and was clearly very infected.
‘The nurse told us she had never seen anything like it before and that I needed to see the surgeon.
‘When he saw it, he started to try to syringe it while pushing down on the breast with the other hand. I was in agony.
‘He didn’t have gloves on and kept telling the nurse “get her to turn away” and “keep her quiet”, because I was screaming.’
A new dressing was applied and she was sent home.
A couple of days later she was again in pain and feeling extremely weak. When her partner contacted the clinic, Bernadette was amazed to discover Mouallem was no longer in the UK.
She was sent to see another Harley Medical Group surgeon, who delivered the devastating news that she had a severe infection and arranged for re-admission to the Highgate.
Bernadette was given antibiotics but the bug spread into the other breast. ‘It was horrifying. There was so much discharge that it would weep through a new dressing and eventually I had to re-do the dressing myself.’
For the next six weeks she was in and out of the hospital but nothing stopped the infection. It was only after she demanded a meeting with the hospital director that she was referred to another specialist, Charles Nduka.
‘He was brilliant, but he had to cut a huge amount of tissue out in order to stop the infection. I’m lucky that I still look relatively normal, with a small scar underneath both breasts.
‘I had hoped that having a breast reduction would allow me to start doing more exercise and get slim. But being so ill and immobile led me to put on weight. Mouallem treated me like something on a conveyor belt.’
Mouallem, who now claims to have UK insurance, said earlier this year: ‘She was a fat lady. She had an infection, it was from the hospital, not from me. The blame gets put on me because it is easier for the company. It wasn’t like she was dying, it was an infection. It can happen with any surgery.’
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Foreign doctor's fatal blunder: 'Negligent' German surgeon flown in to tackle NHS staff crisis left grandmother dead
A grandmother died because of appalling blunders by a German surgeon flown in by the NHS.
Ena Dickinson, 94, lost nearly half the blood in her body during what should have been a routine hip operation.
Werner Kolb cut the wrong muscle, severed an artery and used the wrong cutting tool in what an expert witness described as the worst case of negligence he had come across.
The case highlights again the problems of using foreign doctors to cover staff shortages.
Often recruited through agencies, they are not tested to see if they are up to NHS standards because Brussels rules enforce freedom of movement for EU workers.
In the most notorious case, Daniel Ubani, another German locum, was found to have unlawfully killed a 70-year-old by giving him ten times the proper dose of a painkiller.
Mr Kolb was woefully out of practice for the procedure at Grantham Hospital in Lincolnshire, an inquest was told.
He had performed a relatively small number of hip operations during his career and had been mainly lecturing in the four years before the incident.
He became so flustered in the operating theatre that he started speaking German. Another doctor had to step in amid the chaos.
Incredibly, Mr Kolb was free to work in the UK for eight months after the horrific blunder in August 2008, which left Mrs Dickinson bed-bound. Her inability to walk led to pneumonia that killed her eight weeks later, on October 26.
Professor Angus Wallace, the expert witness, told the court that 70 per cent of elderly hip replacement patients survive for more than a year, meaning that Mr Kolb's error was likely to have caused her death.
Professor Wallace, who has 25 years of experience as an orthopaedic surgeon, told the coroner: 'Mr Kolb was out of his depth and unable to deal with the situation.
'I believe that the operation brought forward her death.
'This is the worst case of negligence that I have come across in my career.'
Mr Kolb refused to attend the inquest and is back working in Germany.
Coroner Stuart Fisher told hospital bosses at the hearing: 'This case leaves me deeply shocked. The trust has to accept responsibility.
'Your role is to provide competent staff and in that you manifestly failed.'
Mrs Dickinson's daughter, Kathy Ingram, 57, a lecturer in decorative arts, said last night: 'My mother's treatment was horrific and devastating. She trusted the NHS and as a nurse, put her life's work into it. She should have been protected.'
She is considering legal action. Her solicitor, Paul Balen, said: 'The current system is disgraceful. There must be closer monitoring of locum doctors otherwise more people will lose their lives.
'Doctors being investigated should be required to co-operate with investigations and not be allowed to get away with appalling negligence.'
Mr Kolb, 51, based at Bethesda Hospital in Stuttgart, was three weeks into a six-week placement at the hospital as holiday cover for another surgeon.
The operation on Mrs Dickinson was the first he had carried out on his own.
Sleaford Coroner's Court in Lincolnshire heard he was not a 'hands-on' doctor and had been working on a thesis.
He cut through the wrong muscle and into a 'danger zone' known as the femoral triangle before plunging the knife into Mrs Dickinson's artery.
He continued with the operation, using an inappropriate power saw to remove a large piece of hip bone, the inquest heard.
It was not until 15 minutes into the procedure, after blood began gushing from the wound, that Mr Kolb realised what he had done.
He became 'upset' and 'agitated' and slipped into his mother tongue, prompting a nurse to demand that he speak English.
A nurse ran for help and a second surgeon, Odathurai Paramasivan, was forced to step in to save Mrs Dickinson's life by stemming bleeding from the large hole in her hip.
Mrs Dickinson was a few minutes from dying on the operating table and lost more than two litres of blood, Mr Paramasivan told the coroner.
'The operation relied on basic anatomical knowledge, even at a junior level. I was horrified by what I saw,' he said.
Mr Kolb was sacked by United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust the following day - but it failed to report him to the General Medical Council because Graham Hale, the deputy medical director, was on leave and then awaiting advice from other agencies.
It was only when Professor Wallace was commissioned by the coroner to examine the evidence in June 2009 that the GMC was notified and Mr Kolb was suspended.
The doctor and the NHS-approved agency, Athona Doctor Recruitment, which hired Dr Kolb, have refused to cooperate with the investigation, the inquest was told. Both have denied wrongdoing.
Mr Kolb told the Mail: 'I consider myself in no way guilty or responsible for the death of this woman. I can clearly recall that after the procedure she was in a good condition.
'She was old and there would always be a risk for a patient of her age but I repeat, the procedure was carried out properly and I say my work had nothing to do with her death.'
Lincolnshire Police are not investigating Mr Kolb.
A spokesman for the United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust, which spends £20million a year on locum staff, said: 'The trust has done everything possible to learn from this incident and to prevent it happening to another patient.'
It has not explained why it had to hire a surgeon from abroad as holiday cover.
Michael Summers, chairman of the Patients Association, said: 'We are against foreign doctors coming over here from European countries with inadequate experience and poor language skills.
'We must stop and think again about how to protect NHS patients and insist the rules are changed.'
Dr Ubani escaped a manslaughter prosecution in the UK after a German court convicted him of death by negligence and gave him a nine-month suspended sentence.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Ena Dickinson, 94, lost nearly half the blood in her body during what should have been a routine hip operation.
Werner Kolb cut the wrong muscle, severed an artery and used the wrong cutting tool in what an expert witness described as the worst case of negligence he had come across.
The case highlights again the problems of using foreign doctors to cover staff shortages.
Often recruited through agencies, they are not tested to see if they are up to NHS standards because Brussels rules enforce freedom of movement for EU workers.
In the most notorious case, Daniel Ubani, another German locum, was found to have unlawfully killed a 70-year-old by giving him ten times the proper dose of a painkiller.
Mr Kolb was woefully out of practice for the procedure at Grantham Hospital in Lincolnshire, an inquest was told.
He had performed a relatively small number of hip operations during his career and had been mainly lecturing in the four years before the incident.
He became so flustered in the operating theatre that he started speaking German. Another doctor had to step in amid the chaos.
Incredibly, Mr Kolb was free to work in the UK for eight months after the horrific blunder in August 2008, which left Mrs Dickinson bed-bound. Her inability to walk led to pneumonia that killed her eight weeks later, on October 26.
Professor Angus Wallace, the expert witness, told the court that 70 per cent of elderly hip replacement patients survive for more than a year, meaning that Mr Kolb's error was likely to have caused her death.
Professor Wallace, who has 25 years of experience as an orthopaedic surgeon, told the coroner: 'Mr Kolb was out of his depth and unable to deal with the situation.
'I believe that the operation brought forward her death.
'This is the worst case of negligence that I have come across in my career.'
Mr Kolb refused to attend the inquest and is back working in Germany.
Coroner Stuart Fisher told hospital bosses at the hearing: 'This case leaves me deeply shocked. The trust has to accept responsibility.
'Your role is to provide competent staff and in that you manifestly failed.'
Mrs Dickinson's daughter, Kathy Ingram, 57, a lecturer in decorative arts, said last night: 'My mother's treatment was horrific and devastating. She trusted the NHS and as a nurse, put her life's work into it. She should have been protected.'
She is considering legal action. Her solicitor, Paul Balen, said: 'The current system is disgraceful. There must be closer monitoring of locum doctors otherwise more people will lose their lives.
'Doctors being investigated should be required to co-operate with investigations and not be allowed to get away with appalling negligence.'
Mr Kolb, 51, based at Bethesda Hospital in Stuttgart, was three weeks into a six-week placement at the hospital as holiday cover for another surgeon.
The operation on Mrs Dickinson was the first he had carried out on his own.
Sleaford Coroner's Court in Lincolnshire heard he was not a 'hands-on' doctor and had been working on a thesis.
He cut through the wrong muscle and into a 'danger zone' known as the femoral triangle before plunging the knife into Mrs Dickinson's artery.
He continued with the operation, using an inappropriate power saw to remove a large piece of hip bone, the inquest heard.
It was not until 15 minutes into the procedure, after blood began gushing from the wound, that Mr Kolb realised what he had done.
He became 'upset' and 'agitated' and slipped into his mother tongue, prompting a nurse to demand that he speak English.
A nurse ran for help and a second surgeon, Odathurai Paramasivan, was forced to step in to save Mrs Dickinson's life by stemming bleeding from the large hole in her hip.
Mrs Dickinson was a few minutes from dying on the operating table and lost more than two litres of blood, Mr Paramasivan told the coroner.
'The operation relied on basic anatomical knowledge, even at a junior level. I was horrified by what I saw,' he said.
Mr Kolb was sacked by United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust the following day - but it failed to report him to the General Medical Council because Graham Hale, the deputy medical director, was on leave and then awaiting advice from other agencies.
It was only when Professor Wallace was commissioned by the coroner to examine the evidence in June 2009 that the GMC was notified and Mr Kolb was suspended.
The doctor and the NHS-approved agency, Athona Doctor Recruitment, which hired Dr Kolb, have refused to cooperate with the investigation, the inquest was told. Both have denied wrongdoing.
Mr Kolb told the Mail: 'I consider myself in no way guilty or responsible for the death of this woman. I can clearly recall that after the procedure she was in a good condition.
'She was old and there would always be a risk for a patient of her age but I repeat, the procedure was carried out properly and I say my work had nothing to do with her death.'
Lincolnshire Police are not investigating Mr Kolb.
A spokesman for the United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust, which spends £20million a year on locum staff, said: 'The trust has done everything possible to learn from this incident and to prevent it happening to another patient.'
It has not explained why it had to hire a surgeon from abroad as holiday cover.
Michael Summers, chairman of the Patients Association, said: 'We are against foreign doctors coming over here from European countries with inadequate experience and poor language skills.
'We must stop and think again about how to protect NHS patients and insist the rules are changed.'
Dr Ubani escaped a manslaughter prosecution in the UK after a German court convicted him of death by negligence and gave him a nine-month suspended sentence.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Friday, 15 March 2013
More than 30 families have taken legal action against a hospital in north-west England for a catalogue of baby and maternal deaths and injuries.
More than 30 families have taken legal action against a hospital in north-west England for a catalogue of baby and maternal deaths and injuries.
They blame poor care and medical negligence at Furness General Hospital at Morecambe Bay in Cumbria.
Parents also allege that important reports were suppressed in the run-up to the local NHS trust achieving foundation trust status in March 2010.
The trust said there was "no denying" families were let down in the past.
The hospital is at the centre of the scandal which is now the subject of a number of investigations including a police inquiry.
Since June 2011, a team of 15 detectives have been investigating a number of deaths at the hospital.
Parents and NHS staff have been interviewed and the BBC understands that police are looking into the possibility of bringing corporate manslaughter charges against the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay Foundation NHS Trust.
James Titcombe, a nuclear engineer living near Barrow-in-Furness, told the BBC how he watched his son Joshua die at just nine days old in November 2008.
Mr Titcombe and his wife, Hoa, are one of five sets of parents to have settled their claim with the trust.
The coroner heard that midwives and medical staff made 10 serious errors that contributed to Joshua's death including a failure to detect and monitor the baby's infection and a failure to provide care before and after birth.
"We asked repeatedly if Joshua should have antibiotics and we were told 'No, he didn't'," said Mr Titcombe.
"He was wheezing and he wasn't feeding properly and my wife called the emergency bell because he was grunting.
"And every time we were told Joshua was fine and that there was nothing to worry about. At no stage was a doctor ever called."
Mr Titcombe described how and his wife watched helplessly as Joshua died from sepsis.
To make matters worse, Joshua's progress chart went missing, never to re-emerge and the coroner later said there was a suspicion that it may have been deliberately destroyed.
Investigation
The government has announced an inquiry to be held in public and there are other investigations into two other NHS bodies in relation to Morecambe Bay.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) stands accused of hindering an investigation into parents' concerns, as well as allowing the trust to get foundation status despite allegations about the standards of the maternity services.
The Health Ombudsman is investigating allegations of poor supervision by the North West Strategic Health Authority.
One of the most serious allegations against the trust is that it suppressed the damning findings of an internal inquiry into maternity services led by nursing expert Dame Pauline Fielding. The report made wide-ranging criticisms.
The report described the team working as "dysfunctional in some parts of the maternity services" and that consultants were preoccupied with their own agendas possessing "little confidence in the clinical leadership" while the management had failed to "establish a common culture… within which good practice could flourish".
In February 2012, a separate report commissioned by the foundation trust's supervisory body, Monitor, also criticised managers.
In the report, the accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers said the trust lacked a "risk management culture", adding that some doctors who had voiced concerns over patient safety had felt ignored.
Dr John Ashton, currently director of public health for Cumbria, told the BBC that he had concerns about the management of the trust for some years.
"I was with a senior manager at Morecambe Bay when he was told about the death of neonatal baby some months after it had taken place," said Dr Ashton, who has recently been appointed as the next president of the Faculty of Public Health.
"It beggars belief that the trust kept the Fielding Report secret. If you've got weak clinical governance, that's a disaster waiting to happen.
"And I think it's quite clear that there's been weak clinical governance at Morecambe Bay for a long time and it wasn't being taken seriously at a board level."
Baby deaths
Of the 37 cases of litigation, 23 were started in the past two years. These 23 cases involve nine baby deaths and eight cases of cerebral palsy. Since 2002, the legal cases have involved the deaths of 14 babies and two mothers.
The CQC said it would publish the findings of an inquiry into its alleged failings by accountants Grant Thornton. A spokesman for the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust said he could not comment on individual cases due to the police inquiry.
John Cowdall, trust chairman, said: "There is no denying that the trust has let women and their families down in the past and there are things that should have been done differently.
"Although we can't change the past, the new trust board is determined that we can learn from it and we will ensure we continue to do so.
"Due to the ongoing police investigation into the deaths of babies and mothers following care received at Furness General Hospital, it would be inappropriate to comment on individual cases. We will continue to co-operate fully and openly with the police."
"The new trust board is resolute in its determination that this trust will never let anyone down again in the way it did in the past, and we will not accept second best for our patients."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
They blame poor care and medical negligence at Furness General Hospital at Morecambe Bay in Cumbria.
Parents also allege that important reports were suppressed in the run-up to the local NHS trust achieving foundation trust status in March 2010.
The trust said there was "no denying" families were let down in the past.
The hospital is at the centre of the scandal which is now the subject of a number of investigations including a police inquiry.
Since June 2011, a team of 15 detectives have been investigating a number of deaths at the hospital.
Every time we were told Joshua was fine and that there was nothing to worry about. At no stage was a doctor ever called”
James Titcombe
Parents and NHS staff have been interviewed and the BBC understands that police are looking into the possibility of bringing corporate manslaughter charges against the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay Foundation NHS Trust.
James Titcombe, a nuclear engineer living near Barrow-in-Furness, told the BBC how he watched his son Joshua die at just nine days old in November 2008.
Mr Titcombe and his wife, Hoa, are one of five sets of parents to have settled their claim with the trust.
The coroner heard that midwives and medical staff made 10 serious errors that contributed to Joshua's death including a failure to detect and monitor the baby's infection and a failure to provide care before and after birth.
"We asked repeatedly if Joshua should have antibiotics and we were told 'No, he didn't'," said Mr Titcombe.
"He was wheezing and he wasn't feeding properly and my wife called the emergency bell because he was grunting.
"And every time we were told Joshua was fine and that there was nothing to worry about. At no stage was a doctor ever called."
Mr Titcombe described how and his wife watched helplessly as Joshua died from sepsis.
To make matters worse, Joshua's progress chart went missing, never to re-emerge and the coroner later said there was a suspicion that it may have been deliberately destroyed.
Investigation
The government has announced an inquiry to be held in public and there are other investigations into two other NHS bodies in relation to Morecambe Bay.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) stands accused of hindering an investigation into parents' concerns, as well as allowing the trust to get foundation status despite allegations about the standards of the maternity services.
The Health Ombudsman is investigating allegations of poor supervision by the North West Strategic Health Authority.
One of the most serious allegations against the trust is that it suppressed the damning findings of an internal inquiry into maternity services led by nursing expert Dame Pauline Fielding. The report made wide-ranging criticisms.
There is no denying that the trust has let women and their families down in the past and there are things that should have been done differently”
John Cowdall Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust
The report described the team working as "dysfunctional in some parts of the maternity services" and that consultants were preoccupied with their own agendas possessing "little confidence in the clinical leadership" while the management had failed to "establish a common culture… within which good practice could flourish".
In February 2012, a separate report commissioned by the foundation trust's supervisory body, Monitor, also criticised managers.
In the report, the accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers said the trust lacked a "risk management culture", adding that some doctors who had voiced concerns over patient safety had felt ignored.
Dr John Ashton, currently director of public health for Cumbria, told the BBC that he had concerns about the management of the trust for some years.
"I was with a senior manager at Morecambe Bay when he was told about the death of neonatal baby some months after it had taken place," said Dr Ashton, who has recently been appointed as the next president of the Faculty of Public Health.
"It beggars belief that the trust kept the Fielding Report secret. If you've got weak clinical governance, that's a disaster waiting to happen.
"And I think it's quite clear that there's been weak clinical governance at Morecambe Bay for a long time and it wasn't being taken seriously at a board level."
Baby deaths
Of the 37 cases of litigation, 23 were started in the past two years. These 23 cases involve nine baby deaths and eight cases of cerebral palsy. Since 2002, the legal cases have involved the deaths of 14 babies and two mothers.
The CQC said it would publish the findings of an inquiry into its alleged failings by accountants Grant Thornton. A spokesman for the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust said he could not comment on individual cases due to the police inquiry.
John Cowdall, trust chairman, said: "There is no denying that the trust has let women and their families down in the past and there are things that should have been done differently.
"Although we can't change the past, the new trust board is determined that we can learn from it and we will ensure we continue to do so.
"Due to the ongoing police investigation into the deaths of babies and mothers following care received at Furness General Hospital, it would be inappropriate to comment on individual cases. We will continue to co-operate fully and openly with the police."
"The new trust board is resolute in its determination that this trust will never let anyone down again in the way it did in the past, and we will not accept second best for our patients."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Wednesday, 13 March 2013
Wounded soldiers sue military hospital for medical negligence after receiving 'poor treatment'
When they signed up to risk life and limb for their country, they expected in return to receive a decent level of care if they were wounded.
But new figures have revealed troops returning injured from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq are suing a specialist hospital for medical negligence.
Over the past three years, 13 soldiers have launched compensation claims against the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Birmingham’s Queen Elizabeth hospital.
The site cares for heroes airlifted home from the frontline and has won a string of awards for its work.
But details released under the Freedom of Information Act show soldiers taking legal action after claiming to have received poor treatment.
And experts say there is a gap between the world-class care frontline soldiers receive on the battlefield and the aftercare they receive when they are repatriated.
Clinical negligence specialist Philippa Tuckman said: ‘I think as far as Birmingham is concerned, there is a gap between the emergency care and what comes next.
‘The acute care is usually very good. The battlefield and emergency treatment is an example to others which has been picked up around the world.
‘What they are not so good at is the general practice and the day to day less dramatic care, which is just as important.
‘Often you have newly qualified military GPs who are not experienced at dealing with the full range of cases they are presented with, unlike an experienced GP.
‘I have clients who say to me, “I assumed as a serviceman I would get the best care possible” and they are surprised when they don’t.’
University Hospital of Birmingham NHS Trust, which runs the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, refused to comment on matters involving military patients.
As well as physical injuries that have been misdiagnosed or mistreated, Ms Tuckman believes the devastating impact of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is still being overlooked, with sufferers being sent back to the frontline.
‘The biggest area relating to active service is psychiatric harm,’ she said. ‘Part of the deal for servicemen is going to warzones like Afghanistan, seeing horrors and having terrible experiences.
‘In some ways PTSD is to be expected, but there are regulations which are supposed to look after you and make sure you aren’t sent back while you are still vulnerable. We’ve got a number of cases where that simply hasn’t happened.
‘It can lead to depression and drinking. It really can snowball and become very serious if people are subjected to tour after tour of duty when suffering psychiatric problems.
‘A better system is needed for dealing with the problem, particularly for helping those with PTSD who are medically discharged.’
The Ministry of Defence refused to go into any detail on any of the medical negligence claims.
But a spokesman pointed out that a fund which could total hundreds of thousands of pounds over the lifetime of a serviceman was available for anyone injured on duty.
In 2008 wounded ex-serviceman Scott Garthley, from Northampton, fought a £2.8million compensation battle with the MoD claiming he had been the victim of negligent treatment.
He claimed he had to pay more than £60,000 in private hospital bills just to ensure he received the vital care not offered to him by the MoD.
Mr Garthley was also ordered to take off his uniform at Selly Oak hospital - then home of the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine - in case it offended ethnic minority patients, sparking national outrage.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
But new figures have revealed troops returning injured from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq are suing a specialist hospital for medical negligence.
Over the past three years, 13 soldiers have launched compensation claims against the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Birmingham’s Queen Elizabeth hospital.
The site cares for heroes airlifted home from the frontline and has won a string of awards for its work.
But details released under the Freedom of Information Act show soldiers taking legal action after claiming to have received poor treatment.
And experts say there is a gap between the world-class care frontline soldiers receive on the battlefield and the aftercare they receive when they are repatriated.
Clinical negligence specialist Philippa Tuckman said: ‘I think as far as Birmingham is concerned, there is a gap between the emergency care and what comes next.
‘The acute care is usually very good. The battlefield and emergency treatment is an example to others which has been picked up around the world.
‘What they are not so good at is the general practice and the day to day less dramatic care, which is just as important.
‘Often you have newly qualified military GPs who are not experienced at dealing with the full range of cases they are presented with, unlike an experienced GP.
‘I have clients who say to me, “I assumed as a serviceman I would get the best care possible” and they are surprised when they don’t.’
University Hospital of Birmingham NHS Trust, which runs the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, refused to comment on matters involving military patients.
As well as physical injuries that have been misdiagnosed or mistreated, Ms Tuckman believes the devastating impact of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is still being overlooked, with sufferers being sent back to the frontline.
‘The biggest area relating to active service is psychiatric harm,’ she said. ‘Part of the deal for servicemen is going to warzones like Afghanistan, seeing horrors and having terrible experiences.
‘In some ways PTSD is to be expected, but there are regulations which are supposed to look after you and make sure you aren’t sent back while you are still vulnerable. We’ve got a number of cases where that simply hasn’t happened.
‘It can lead to depression and drinking. It really can snowball and become very serious if people are subjected to tour after tour of duty when suffering psychiatric problems.
‘A better system is needed for dealing with the problem, particularly for helping those with PTSD who are medically discharged.’
The Ministry of Defence refused to go into any detail on any of the medical negligence claims.
But a spokesman pointed out that a fund which could total hundreds of thousands of pounds over the lifetime of a serviceman was available for anyone injured on duty.
In 2008 wounded ex-serviceman Scott Garthley, from Northampton, fought a £2.8million compensation battle with the MoD claiming he had been the victim of negligent treatment.
He claimed he had to pay more than £60,000 in private hospital bills just to ensure he received the vital care not offered to him by the MoD.
Mr Garthley was also ordered to take off his uniform at Selly Oak hospital - then home of the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine - in case it offended ethnic minority patients, sparking national outrage.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
USA: IU Health taking extra steps to avoid deadly surgical error
IU Health is one of a small percentage of hospital systems across the country that have invested in technology that would help prevent surgical sponges from being lost in patients’ bodies.
Surgical sponges left inside patients can create a potentially dangerous and deadly result. Still, the mistakes have been made in plenty of Indiana hospitals, some who have not made more recent investments in preventative technologies.
“They do the right thing most of the time,” said Lynn Bridgewater, Director of Operations and Perioperative Services at IU Health Methodist Hospital.
Bridgewater said her employees make mistakes, but they are leaving little room for errors involving surgical sponges in recent years.
IU Health spent more than $250,000 at three hospitals on radio frequency tracking devices that detect sensors implanted in surgical sponges. An additional $8 investment is also required during every surgery.
“Six years ago, we had 13 incidents of retained sponges, and one was too many,” said Bridgewater, who claims they also count instruments and other tools, a long-time practice.
A sponge left inside a body can cause a serious infection that may not be discovered right away.
“It’s a clear breach, a very clear act of negligence,” said Caroline Gilchrist, a medical malpractice attorney with Baker and Gilchrist in Avon.
She has had two sponge cases in recent years. She could not specifically talk to either case, claiming the cases were settled outside of court and confidentiality agreements were signed.
These incidents got real attention in Indiana when an executive order was signed requiring all hospitals and surgery centers to report if any foreign object is left inside a body.
There has been a slight decline in the amount of cases overall statewide, and some experts attribute the improvement to fewer sponge-related incidents.
“Everybody makes mistakes. The question is are you going to stand up and take responsibility for that,” said Gilcrhist.
“Hospitals are well aware that they need to report these things, but it does have a definition that must be met before its reportable, and there are some exclusions,” said Betsy Lee with the Indiana Hospital Association.
She claims not every hospital needs to make the expensive technology investment. There are other options.
An Indiana hospital can be responsible for up to $250,000 in damages if a mistake is made., though.
“It’s not a lot. In fact, that small investment is what helps me sleep at night,” said Bridgewater of the hospitals investment in the special sponges.
She added that they have had no incidents of sponges being left inside patients in five and a half years. That is when the hospital went through with the changes.
This article is courtesy of Fox 59.
Surgical sponges left inside patients can create a potentially dangerous and deadly result. Still, the mistakes have been made in plenty of Indiana hospitals, some who have not made more recent investments in preventative technologies.
“They do the right thing most of the time,” said Lynn Bridgewater, Director of Operations and Perioperative Services at IU Health Methodist Hospital.
Bridgewater said her employees make mistakes, but they are leaving little room for errors involving surgical sponges in recent years.
IU Health spent more than $250,000 at three hospitals on radio frequency tracking devices that detect sensors implanted in surgical sponges. An additional $8 investment is also required during every surgery.
“Six years ago, we had 13 incidents of retained sponges, and one was too many,” said Bridgewater, who claims they also count instruments and other tools, a long-time practice.
A sponge left inside a body can cause a serious infection that may not be discovered right away.
“It’s a clear breach, a very clear act of negligence,” said Caroline Gilchrist, a medical malpractice attorney with Baker and Gilchrist in Avon.
She has had two sponge cases in recent years. She could not specifically talk to either case, claiming the cases were settled outside of court and confidentiality agreements were signed.
These incidents got real attention in Indiana when an executive order was signed requiring all hospitals and surgery centers to report if any foreign object is left inside a body.
There has been a slight decline in the amount of cases overall statewide, and some experts attribute the improvement to fewer sponge-related incidents.
“Everybody makes mistakes. The question is are you going to stand up and take responsibility for that,” said Gilcrhist.
“Hospitals are well aware that they need to report these things, but it does have a definition that must be met before its reportable, and there are some exclusions,” said Betsy Lee with the Indiana Hospital Association.
She claims not every hospital needs to make the expensive technology investment. There are other options.
An Indiana hospital can be responsible for up to $250,000 in damages if a mistake is made., though.
“It’s not a lot. In fact, that small investment is what helps me sleep at night,” said Bridgewater of the hospitals investment in the special sponges.
She added that they have had no incidents of sponges being left inside patients in five and a half years. That is when the hospital went through with the changes.
This article is courtesy of Fox 59.
Woman died after ambulance error
A 93-year-old woman died after she fell when left at the wrong house by an ambulance crew, an inquest has heard.
The crew realised their mistake when they arrived at Mary Purnell's correct address, but dropped off more patients before returning to find her.
When they arrived at the house in Dinas Powys, south Wales, Mrs Purnell, who had dementia, was found with a broken leg. She died five weeks later.
A narrative verdict was returned at Cardiff coroner's court.
A narrative verdict is used when a chain of events has led to a person's death.
After the verdict, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust said it wished to express its condolences to Mrs Purnell's family.
In a statement, the trust added: "The trust has reviewed its procedures following the incident and has listened carefully to the conclusions of the inquest and the coroner's comments."
A spokeswoman for the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust said: "Following this tragic incident, Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust has conducted an internal investigation, co-operated fully with all other agencies and reviewed and continues to review its policies and procedures."
The court heard that on 20 August, 2003, Mrs Purnell had been to a day unit in Barry.
She was collected at the end of the day by an ambulance crew who had around five or six other patients to take home.
Ambulance man Roy Jeffries told the hearing that he and driver David MacAdam were given a list of names and addresses, but the list contained details of people due to travel on one of two ambulances.
Empty house
They were not told which patients would be on their vehicle.
When the ambulance arrived at the house in Dinas Powys they "assumed" that Mrs Purnell lived there, the court heard.
In fact the woman who lived there had earlier been collected from the day centre by her son.
The ambulance staff found a door key under a flower pot, took Mrs Purnell into the empty house, placed her in a chair and left.
Asked why Mrs Purnell had been picked out, Mr MacAdam said: "I honestly can't answer that question."
After leaving the pensioner in Dinas Powys, the ambulance crew drove to the home she shared with her daughter, Christine Jones, in nearby Penarth.
"Mrs Purnell's daughter came out and met us and we didn't know who was to be dropped off," said Mr MacAdam.
'Redress mistake'
"We knew it was a Mrs Purnell but we didn't know who Mrs Purnell was, so I asked her to identify her mother.
"She could not. Then I realised we had made an awful mistake.
"We said we would go back to Dinas Powys and try to redress the mistake."
Mr MacAdam said he decided to drop off the rest of his patients before going back to collect Mrs Purnell because at least one person on board needed to use the toilet.
When the ambulance crew returned to the house where they had left Mrs Purnell in Dinas Powys, they found her lying on a garden terrace, crying in pain.
The widow, who had dementia and chronic lymphatic leukaemia and could not be left alone, had suffered a broken leg in the fall. She died in hospital on 29 September.
'Left unsupervised'
Cardiff and Vale coroner Dr Lawrence Addicott said: "The pathologist said she died from bronchial pneumonia due to dementia, chronic lymphatic leukaemia and the fracture.
"He was unable to say that one of those three conditions was directly related to her death more than the other.
"The fractured femur had been a contributory factor since she had become immobile since the operation."
Delivering a narrative verdict, Dr Addicott added: "Mrs Purnell, who suffered from chronic lymphatic leukaemia and dementia, died following a fracture of the femur that she sustained when she fell in the garden of a premises to which she had been returned from a day centre.
"She had been returned to the incorrect address, of which she was not familiar, and left unsupervised."
Solicitor Peter Maynard, acting for Mrs Purnell's family, said they were considering whether to take further action and hoped that steps had been taken to prevent such an incident ever happening again.
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
The crew realised their mistake when they arrived at Mary Purnell's correct address, but dropped off more patients before returning to find her.
When they arrived at the house in Dinas Powys, south Wales, Mrs Purnell, who had dementia, was found with a broken leg. She died five weeks later.
A narrative verdict was returned at Cardiff coroner's court.
A narrative verdict is used when a chain of events has led to a person's death.
After the verdict, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust said it wished to express its condolences to Mrs Purnell's family.
In a statement, the trust added: "The trust has reviewed its procedures following the incident and has listened carefully to the conclusions of the inquest and the coroner's comments."
A spokeswoman for the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust said: "Following this tragic incident, Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust has conducted an internal investigation, co-operated fully with all other agencies and reviewed and continues to review its policies and procedures."
The court heard that on 20 August, 2003, Mrs Purnell had been to a day unit in Barry.
She was collected at the end of the day by an ambulance crew who had around five or six other patients to take home.
Ambulance man Roy Jeffries told the hearing that he and driver David MacAdam were given a list of names and addresses, but the list contained details of people due to travel on one of two ambulances.
Empty house
They were not told which patients would be on their vehicle.
When the ambulance arrived at the house in Dinas Powys they "assumed" that Mrs Purnell lived there, the court heard.
In fact the woman who lived there had earlier been collected from the day centre by her son.
The ambulance staff found a door key under a flower pot, took Mrs Purnell into the empty house, placed her in a chair and left.
Asked why Mrs Purnell had been picked out, Mr MacAdam said: "I honestly can't answer that question."
After leaving the pensioner in Dinas Powys, the ambulance crew drove to the home she shared with her daughter, Christine Jones, in nearby Penarth.
"Mrs Purnell's daughter came out and met us and we didn't know who was to be dropped off," said Mr MacAdam.
'Redress mistake'
"We knew it was a Mrs Purnell but we didn't know who Mrs Purnell was, so I asked her to identify her mother.
"She could not. Then I realised we had made an awful mistake.
"We said we would go back to Dinas Powys and try to redress the mistake."
Mr MacAdam said he decided to drop off the rest of his patients before going back to collect Mrs Purnell because at least one person on board needed to use the toilet.
When the ambulance crew returned to the house where they had left Mrs Purnell in Dinas Powys, they found her lying on a garden terrace, crying in pain.
The widow, who had dementia and chronic lymphatic leukaemia and could not be left alone, had suffered a broken leg in the fall. She died in hospital on 29 September.
'Left unsupervised'
Cardiff and Vale coroner Dr Lawrence Addicott said: "The pathologist said she died from bronchial pneumonia due to dementia, chronic lymphatic leukaemia and the fracture.
"He was unable to say that one of those three conditions was directly related to her death more than the other.
"The fractured femur had been a contributory factor since she had become immobile since the operation."
Delivering a narrative verdict, Dr Addicott added: "Mrs Purnell, who suffered from chronic lymphatic leukaemia and dementia, died following a fracture of the femur that she sustained when she fell in the garden of a premises to which she had been returned from a day centre.
"She had been returned to the incorrect address, of which she was not familiar, and left unsupervised."
Solicitor Peter Maynard, acting for Mrs Purnell's family, said they were considering whether to take further action and hoped that steps had been taken to prevent such an incident ever happening again.
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Thursday, 7 March 2013
Complaints about 'negligent' surgeon ignored by hospitals
Hospital chiefs face calls for an inquiry after claims they ignored repeated warnings about the competence of a paediatric surgeon found guilty of misconduct.
Dr Pierina Kapur, 43, faces being struck-off this week after a General Medical Council panel heard how she removed 90 per cent of a seven-week-old baby girl's bladder – mistaking it for a hernia during an operation at Manchester Children's Hospital in 2008. The panel concluded that her conduct was so poor it went "beyond mere negligence" and rejected claims she was a competent and safe surgeon.
Documents seen by The Independent on Sunday show that several of Dr Kapur's colleagues alerted senior hospital staff at Alder Hey, in Liverpool, and Manchester children's hospitals about her abilities to operate safely as early as 2005. This included the case of Logan Cockcroft, six, who nearly died after a routine stomach operation was botched. Dr Kapur went on to qualify as a consultant in 2006.
The claims will add to mounting concerns that patient safety is being dismissed or ignored by health officials. Next week, Parliament will debate a Private Member's Bill to strengthen protection for NHS whistleblowers. The NHS Public Interest Disclosure Support Bill calls for the introduction of independent support officers to whom whistleblowers can speak anonymously without fear of reprisals or being ignored.
Last year MPs heard that staff concerns at Mid Staffs Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died because of poor care, were ignored by hospital managers.
"We need to find out why nothing was done about these complaints so we can stop concerns about patient safety being sat on," said Dr Richard Taylor, an independent MP who introduced the bill.
Logan Cockcroft, from Burnley, almost died when Dr Kapur failed to notice she had skewered his colon while inserting a feeding tube into his stomach. The life-threatening mistake was discovered 10 months later by a surgeon at Alder Hey after Logan's weight dropped to 12lbs and his mother, Jill, insisted on a second opinion. She has referred his case to the GMC.
Alder Hey hospital, where Dr Kapur was a trainee, says it has "no record" of any complaints against her. Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust was unable to confirm any prior complaints about Dr Kapur.
Dr Mark Porter, the chairman of the British Medical Association's consultants committee, said: "A situation in which people feel scared to speak out, or do not have confidence their concerns will be taken seriously, is unacceptable, and potentially dangerous."
This article is courtesy The Independent.
Dr Pierina Kapur, 43, faces being struck-off this week after a General Medical Council panel heard how she removed 90 per cent of a seven-week-old baby girl's bladder – mistaking it for a hernia during an operation at Manchester Children's Hospital in 2008. The panel concluded that her conduct was so poor it went "beyond mere negligence" and rejected claims she was a competent and safe surgeon.
Documents seen by The Independent on Sunday show that several of Dr Kapur's colleagues alerted senior hospital staff at Alder Hey, in Liverpool, and Manchester children's hospitals about her abilities to operate safely as early as 2005. This included the case of Logan Cockcroft, six, who nearly died after a routine stomach operation was botched. Dr Kapur went on to qualify as a consultant in 2006.
The claims will add to mounting concerns that patient safety is being dismissed or ignored by health officials. Next week, Parliament will debate a Private Member's Bill to strengthen protection for NHS whistleblowers. The NHS Public Interest Disclosure Support Bill calls for the introduction of independent support officers to whom whistleblowers can speak anonymously without fear of reprisals or being ignored.
Last year MPs heard that staff concerns at Mid Staffs Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died because of poor care, were ignored by hospital managers.
"We need to find out why nothing was done about these complaints so we can stop concerns about patient safety being sat on," said Dr Richard Taylor, an independent MP who introduced the bill.
Logan Cockcroft, from Burnley, almost died when Dr Kapur failed to notice she had skewered his colon while inserting a feeding tube into his stomach. The life-threatening mistake was discovered 10 months later by a surgeon at Alder Hey after Logan's weight dropped to 12lbs and his mother, Jill, insisted on a second opinion. She has referred his case to the GMC.
Alder Hey hospital, where Dr Kapur was a trainee, says it has "no record" of any complaints against her. Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust was unable to confirm any prior complaints about Dr Kapur.
Dr Mark Porter, the chairman of the British Medical Association's consultants committee, said: "A situation in which people feel scared to speak out, or do not have confidence their concerns will be taken seriously, is unacceptable, and potentially dangerous."
This article is courtesy The Independent.
Wednesday, 6 March 2013
Queen's Hospital faces legal action over baby's disability
The mother of a brain-damaged baby has accused a hospital of causing her son's disability due to a clinical failure.
Emma Morgan's son Brandon, born at Queen's Hospital in Romford, was left severely disabled after his brain was starved of oxygen at birth.
Maternity services at the hospital had previously been under scrutiny by the health regulator - but earlier this year it said standards were being met.
The hospital insists it followed medical protocol.
Emma Morgan said Queen's Hospital knew she was a high risk mum, in danger of having a placenta abruption.
But despite that they sent her home after she came in complaining of abdominal pains, she said.
Within hours Brandon had become separated from his mother's placenta - starving his brain of oxygen.
'Glowing' report
An emergency caesarean section saved his life - but by then the prospects of a normal one had been ruined.
Emma Morgan is now taking legal action. She said: "He's been diagnosed with cerebral palsy, he had seizures at birth, he's got a cluster of cysts at the back of his brain.
"I think the pains were the start of the placenta abrupting and if they had done a scan and he was born at that time when I first went in he wouldn't probably have all these problems."
It is not the first time allegations of clinical failure have been made against Queen's Hospital's maternity unit.
In 2011 BBC London revealed medical negligence that led to the death of Serena Ali and her unborn daughter.
By that July the hospital was under emergency measures and the trust employed an additional 60 midwives.
A year on, and a report by the regulator, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), said care was improving.
It was in the same month Brandon was born severely brain damaged.
And it has now emerged five other mothers are considering suing the hospital for negligence over its clinical decision-making.
The hospital described its recent CQC report as "glowing", claiming it provides "high quality care".
It released a statement which said: "We held a post-birth review which confirmed that the care and treatment met all accepted medical practices."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Emma Morgan's son Brandon, born at Queen's Hospital in Romford, was left severely disabled after his brain was starved of oxygen at birth.
Maternity services at the hospital had previously been under scrutiny by the health regulator - but earlier this year it said standards were being met.
The hospital insists it followed medical protocol.
Emma Morgan said Queen's Hospital knew she was a high risk mum, in danger of having a placenta abruption.
"If they had done a scan and he was born at that time when I first went in he wouldn't probably have all these problems”
Emma Morgan
But despite that they sent her home after she came in complaining of abdominal pains, she said.
Within hours Brandon had become separated from his mother's placenta - starving his brain of oxygen.
'Glowing' report
An emergency caesarean section saved his life - but by then the prospects of a normal one had been ruined.
Emma Morgan is now taking legal action. She said: "He's been diagnosed with cerebral palsy, he had seizures at birth, he's got a cluster of cysts at the back of his brain.
"I think the pains were the start of the placenta abrupting and if they had done a scan and he was born at that time when I first went in he wouldn't probably have all these problems."
It is not the first time allegations of clinical failure have been made against Queen's Hospital's maternity unit.
In 2011 BBC London revealed medical negligence that led to the death of Serena Ali and her unborn daughter.
By that July the hospital was under emergency measures and the trust employed an additional 60 midwives.
A year on, and a report by the regulator, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), said care was improving.
It was in the same month Brandon was born severely brain damaged.
And it has now emerged five other mothers are considering suing the hospital for negligence over its clinical decision-making.
The hospital described its recent CQC report as "glowing", claiming it provides "high quality care".
It released a statement which said: "We held a post-birth review which confirmed that the care and treatment met all accepted medical practices."
This article is courtesy of BBC News.
Saturday, 2 March 2013
Surgeon who delivered David Cameron's baby Florence facing legal action
An NHS surgeon facing legal action from 60 female patients was allowed to work for two decades even though hospital authorities knew he was responsible for a string of blunders, it can be disclosed.
Rob Jones was even allowed to deliver Samantha and David Cameron’s fourth child, Florence, by caesarean section in August 2010 despite the fact that the hospital’s own investigations had identified his “significant surgical incompetence”.
The obstetrician and gynaecologist has been blamed for a series of catastrophic errors, including the death of a baby in January 2010, seven months before Mrs Cameron gave birth at the Royal Cornwall Hospital. By then midwives had tried to stop him working alone because of their fears.
In another case the hospital paid out £9million to a baby born brain damaged in 1993, after Mr Jones failed to spot warning signs in the mother’s medical condition. For years, colleagues warned that his patients were being put at risk, but an internal review decided it would be a “mammoth task” to compare his record with that of other surgeons.
On Saturday night Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, said the scandal highlighted the need for hospitals to hold doctors to professional standards, audit their performance, and publish the results. Now, lawyers acting for 60 women are preparing a multi-million-pound action against the hospital trust that employed Mr Jones from 1992 until last year.
The cases include:
He then retired and removed himself from the medical register — meaning he cannot face disciplinary procedures by the General Medical Council. However there were previously seven official reviews into Mr Jones’s professional competence — the first in 1997, when the hospital realised they faced more claims against him than any other obstetric consultant.
The hospital’s own reports show that on 23 different occasions concerns had been raised about his performance — but the problems were never properly examined. Sir Bruce said: “If a doctor doesn’t know what the hell he is doing, how can anyone help them or the patients they are treating?
“There is no excuse for any doctor or hospital not to examine performance properly.”
The final investigation followed an anonymous letter which was sent to Mr Cameron at Downing Street in June 2011 and passed on to the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust. That culminated in the publication last week of a series of damning reports into Mr Jones and the obstetrics and gynaecology services at the hospital.
Carole Gill, a college English lecturer whose daughter Maggie died in January 2010, is planning legal action after Mr Jones and other staff failed to spot acute pancreatitis during her pregnancy. Maggie died two days after being born with severe brain damage.
Miss Gill, 35, said: “My illness should have been picked up sooner. If it had been, things might have turned out very differently.”
The mother of a baby born with brain damage in 1993 has now received a £9million compensation payment. The woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, said that had the signs of pre-eclampsia been spotted by Mr Jones, her son — in all likelihood — would have been born without any problems.
Mike Bird, a clinical negligence solicitor at the law firm Foot Anstey who represents 45 of the women threatening legal action, said yesterday that serious failings had been identified at the hospital in an official report published last week by Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust. “Many of the women I act for have already contacted me to say how angry and upset they feel about the catalogue of missed opportunities and excuses they have seen in the report,” he said.
Although the concerns about Mr Jones were first officially raised in 1997 when he was made clinical director, and include obstetric cases, the trust’s inquiry only examined gynaecological cases between 2010 and 2012.
It found that 52 patients suffered complications, and an additional 57 women have been recalled for further examination. Lawyers and victims complain the review was far too limited and did not go back far enough.
The first investigation into Mr Jones was in 1997, when it was found he was recording a higher number of legal claims than his colleagues in obstetrics. Another investigation was held a year later. In 2001, a nurse highlighted 15 cases involving Mr Jones but no full investigation was undertaken after it was declared a “mammoth task” to go through records.
In 2007 there was another investigation, then in 2008, a review of treatment of 45 of Mr Jones’s patients found “significant surgical incompetence”. But the hospital’s then medical director was persuaded by Mr Jones not to take any further action. The report describes Mr Jones as “charming and disarming” in his efforts to save his career.
In January 2010, after Miss Gill’s baby died, he was suspended temporarily from practising obstetrics. He was allowed to return to such work in February 2010 although in July 2010, according to the report, there was still a “high level of concern”. A month later he delivered the Camerons’ baby.
The anonymous letter sent to Downing Street and passed on to the hospital was followed by two further reviews. The final report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in April 2012 concluded he should not return to work.
Martin Watts, chairman of the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust, said: “On behalf of the trust I wish to unreservedly apologise to these women and their families for the pain, distress and anxiety caused by the practice of former obstetric and gynaecology consultant Mr Rob Jones.”
He said the review “confirms that concerns identified about some of Mr Jones’s practice should have been addressed with more vigour and urgency”.
A statement issued by the Medical Defence Union, on behalf of Mr Jones, said: “Mr Jones was pleased to note that of the 2,400 women whose care was reviewed, in nearly 95 per cent of cases there was no cause for concern. He is of course sorry for any patient who suffered a complication of surgery and to any patient who has had the stress of their care being reviewed.”
The union said Mr Jones had cooperated “fully” with inquiries, and was only made aware of two of the investigations — one by the trust, the other by the Royal College — and added: “He was unaware of concerns apparently expressed about his practice to Trust management at other times. Mr Jones has always been prepared to talk openly and constructively with the Trust about concerns relating to his practice.”
This article is courtesy of The Telegraph.
Rob Jones was even allowed to deliver Samantha and David Cameron’s fourth child, Florence, by caesarean section in August 2010 despite the fact that the hospital’s own investigations had identified his “significant surgical incompetence”.
The obstetrician and gynaecologist has been blamed for a series of catastrophic errors, including the death of a baby in January 2010, seven months before Mrs Cameron gave birth at the Royal Cornwall Hospital. By then midwives had tried to stop him working alone because of their fears.
In another case the hospital paid out £9million to a baby born brain damaged in 1993, after Mr Jones failed to spot warning signs in the mother’s medical condition. For years, colleagues warned that his patients were being put at risk, but an internal review decided it would be a “mammoth task” to compare his record with that of other surgeons.
On Saturday night Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, said the scandal highlighted the need for hospitals to hold doctors to professional standards, audit their performance, and publish the results. Now, lawyers acting for 60 women are preparing a multi-million-pound action against the hospital trust that employed Mr Jones from 1992 until last year.
The cases include:
- A mother whose baby died of severe brain damage two days after birth
- A woman who underwent a botched hysterectomy that left her in agony and enduring four further operations to repair the mistakes
- A grandmother left in pain for a decade after routine surgery went wrong
He then retired and removed himself from the medical register — meaning he cannot face disciplinary procedures by the General Medical Council. However there were previously seven official reviews into Mr Jones’s professional competence — the first in 1997, when the hospital realised they faced more claims against him than any other obstetric consultant.
The hospital’s own reports show that on 23 different occasions concerns had been raised about his performance — but the problems were never properly examined. Sir Bruce said: “If a doctor doesn’t know what the hell he is doing, how can anyone help them or the patients they are treating?
“There is no excuse for any doctor or hospital not to examine performance properly.”
The final investigation followed an anonymous letter which was sent to Mr Cameron at Downing Street in June 2011 and passed on to the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust. That culminated in the publication last week of a series of damning reports into Mr Jones and the obstetrics and gynaecology services at the hospital.
Carole Gill, a college English lecturer whose daughter Maggie died in January 2010, is planning legal action after Mr Jones and other staff failed to spot acute pancreatitis during her pregnancy. Maggie died two days after being born with severe brain damage.
Miss Gill, 35, said: “My illness should have been picked up sooner. If it had been, things might have turned out very differently.”
The mother of a baby born with brain damage in 1993 has now received a £9million compensation payment. The woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, said that had the signs of pre-eclampsia been spotted by Mr Jones, her son — in all likelihood — would have been born without any problems.
Mike Bird, a clinical negligence solicitor at the law firm Foot Anstey who represents 45 of the women threatening legal action, said yesterday that serious failings had been identified at the hospital in an official report published last week by Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust. “Many of the women I act for have already contacted me to say how angry and upset they feel about the catalogue of missed opportunities and excuses they have seen in the report,” he said.
Although the concerns about Mr Jones were first officially raised in 1997 when he was made clinical director, and include obstetric cases, the trust’s inquiry only examined gynaecological cases between 2010 and 2012.
It found that 52 patients suffered complications, and an additional 57 women have been recalled for further examination. Lawyers and victims complain the review was far too limited and did not go back far enough.
The first investigation into Mr Jones was in 1997, when it was found he was recording a higher number of legal claims than his colleagues in obstetrics. Another investigation was held a year later. In 2001, a nurse highlighted 15 cases involving Mr Jones but no full investigation was undertaken after it was declared a “mammoth task” to go through records.
In 2007 there was another investigation, then in 2008, a review of treatment of 45 of Mr Jones’s patients found “significant surgical incompetence”. But the hospital’s then medical director was persuaded by Mr Jones not to take any further action. The report describes Mr Jones as “charming and disarming” in his efforts to save his career.
In January 2010, after Miss Gill’s baby died, he was suspended temporarily from practising obstetrics. He was allowed to return to such work in February 2010 although in July 2010, according to the report, there was still a “high level of concern”. A month later he delivered the Camerons’ baby.
The anonymous letter sent to Downing Street and passed on to the hospital was followed by two further reviews. The final report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in April 2012 concluded he should not return to work.
Martin Watts, chairman of the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust, said: “On behalf of the trust I wish to unreservedly apologise to these women and their families for the pain, distress and anxiety caused by the practice of former obstetric and gynaecology consultant Mr Rob Jones.”
He said the review “confirms that concerns identified about some of Mr Jones’s practice should have been addressed with more vigour and urgency”.
A statement issued by the Medical Defence Union, on behalf of Mr Jones, said: “Mr Jones was pleased to note that of the 2,400 women whose care was reviewed, in nearly 95 per cent of cases there was no cause for concern. He is of course sorry for any patient who suffered a complication of surgery and to any patient who has had the stress of their care being reviewed.”
The union said Mr Jones had cooperated “fully” with inquiries, and was only made aware of two of the investigations — one by the trust, the other by the Royal College — and added: “He was unaware of concerns apparently expressed about his practice to Trust management at other times. Mr Jones has always been prepared to talk openly and constructively with the Trust about concerns relating to his practice.”
This article is courtesy of The Telegraph.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)