The bereaved mother of Utah teen is convinced her otherwise healthy son's death was caused by a flu-shot he was given the day before he fell ill - in a case which baffled doctors.
In the obituary for her son, Chandler, 19, Lori Webb said that her son was given his first ever shot on October 15th after agreeing to travel on a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
However, the day after receiving the flu and tuberculosis shots, the Brighton High School graduate began suffering sever vomiting and was admitted to hospital in Salt Lake City wehere he fell into a coma 24-hours later.
'Sicker than he has ever been in his life. He says he's never shook so hard his whole life. He had the worst headache, throw up, and he slept for about two and a half days and didn't eat anything during that time,' said Webb to the Salt Lake Tribune.
Chandler was ultimately taken off life support after a month in a coma and he died on Tuesday after 28 days in the hospital.
Chandler Webb’s direct cause of death was swelling of the brain, his mother said.
But Lori claims that it has to be the flu shot because her had never been ill before.
'We're angry because we believe it's the flu shot that caused it,' said Lori to the Salt Lake Tribune.
However, Chandler's doctors have not discussed his case and public health officials repeated that the vaccine is safe and rarely has serious side effects.
Lori has decided not to have an autopsy, deciding that the results of a brain biopsy will be sufficient to determine the cause of death.
Chandler's medical team, which included six neurologists at Intermountain Medical Center in Murray, tested him for every conceivable illness - including Lyme disease and sexually transmitted ones.
'They checked every virus, every fungus, ever tick, west nile they even checked for rabies,' said Webb. 'And they can't find anything...it was the most senseless, senseless, death.'
'This was his first flu shot,' Webb said. 'He’d never had one before.'
'I hate this. 'I hate that I have to bury my son.'
Utah Department of Health spokesman Tom Hudachko said the state is aware of the case but can’t verify the cause of death or whether it is investigating.
The health department also has no record of anyone from Utah dying from a reaction to the vaccine, he said.
'Like with other medical procedures, there can be side effects and adverse reactions,' he said.
'In the vast majority of those cases the side effects are not very severe — soreness at the injection site, low fever, achiness. Occasionally, yes, there are more severe side effects from receiving the vaccine.'
130 million people nationwide, nearly half of Americans, get the flu vaccine every year and side effects are extremely rare.
Out of those 130 million people, about 140 people report serious side-effects.
Chandler Webb was described as a healthy teen, who visited the gym five days a week before he fell ill.
Lori Webb described how as her son was taken off life-support she cut his hair for the last time and told him the story of 'The Three Billy Goats Gruff', just as she did when he was a child.
'I can’t describe how hard it is to lose a child,' she said.
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Regularly updated blog featuring news, articles and information relating to clinical/medical negligence.
Friday, 29 November 2013
Wednesday, 27 November 2013
Comparing hospital data worldwide will drive up quality
We learned recently that it costs about £3,700 to deliver a child in the UK.
In a new report, the National Audit Office revealed that the NHS has spent nearly a fifth of its maternity services budget covering compensation costs paid out when errors or negligence result in the death or injury of an infant. Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee called it "scandalous". The Department of Health replied that the UK was one of the safest places in the world to have a baby; but the National Audit Office said that, although the situation is complicated, this "does not represent good value for money".
So who is right? To judge whether or not our maternity services are as safe as they should be and as cost-efficient as possible, we would have to compare them with the way in which other countries manage pregnancy and birth. Until recently, there were few direct comparisons of clinical outcomes at hospital level between various healthcare systems across international borders.
However, a new project means that staff across a wide range of disciplines will now be able to directly compare what happens inhospitals abroad with what is happening in the UK. Eleven hospitals in the UK have joined Dr Foster Intelligence's global comparators project, an international collaboration which so far has allowed 40 hospitals across Europe, Australia and the US to share data.
It is the first time that chief executive officers, chief medical officers and lead clinicians in world-class hospitals have been able to share cost and quality metric data on a global scale. The project empowers healthcare professionals to analyse caseloads similar to their own, drilling all the way down to patient-level data. Members can compare mortality, length of stay, re-admission and complication rates across 259 clinical diagnoses and 38 clinical procedure groups, all across national borders.
University hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) is one of the project participants. It was able to compare its performance on heart attack patients with Yale New-Haven hospital in the US and saw that there could be room for improvement.
UHCW found its ambulance crews were only alerting the cardiology team as they were approaching the hospital, giving staff little time for preparation. Now, the ambulance crews trigger an alert as soon as they make the diagnosis of heart attack on the ECG, so that the cardiology team can be waiting for the patient to arrive in the emergency department. By studying how patients were managed in Yale New-Haven and adopting many of their methods, UHCW has achieved a 25% reduction rate in emergency patient mortality.
The first tentative findings from the global comparators project are now beginning to appear in academic journals. US hospitals are found to have had the lowest in-hospital mortality rates; but that is partly due to shorter lengths of stay. When mortality rates for stroke patients were compared including discharged patients, previous differences disappeared. US hospitals also had a higher 30-day re-admission rate than other participating hospitals – 9.4% compared with 6.6% in England and 4.9% in the other hospitals.
The Australian state of Victoria recently decided it would use these tools to understand healthcare performance across all of its hospitals, following the Australian government's announcement of a big data strategy. It is increasingly being realised that data itself means nothing if it's not trusted and acted upon – it's of no use being gathered but then sitting in a filing cabinet or on the cloud.
The use of data to drive improvements in performance is still in its relative infancy in the healthcare sector, but projects such as global comparators are setting the standard for what is achievable.
Thanks to the availability of data, patients around the world will continue to experience ever-greater improvements in the quality of care they receive.
This article is courtesy from The Guardian.
In a new report, the National Audit Office revealed that the NHS has spent nearly a fifth of its maternity services budget covering compensation costs paid out when errors or negligence result in the death or injury of an infant. Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee called it "scandalous". The Department of Health replied that the UK was one of the safest places in the world to have a baby; but the National Audit Office said that, although the situation is complicated, this "does not represent good value for money".
So who is right? To judge whether or not our maternity services are as safe as they should be and as cost-efficient as possible, we would have to compare them with the way in which other countries manage pregnancy and birth. Until recently, there were few direct comparisons of clinical outcomes at hospital level between various healthcare systems across international borders.
However, a new project means that staff across a wide range of disciplines will now be able to directly compare what happens inhospitals abroad with what is happening in the UK. Eleven hospitals in the UK have joined Dr Foster Intelligence's global comparators project, an international collaboration which so far has allowed 40 hospitals across Europe, Australia and the US to share data.
It is the first time that chief executive officers, chief medical officers and lead clinicians in world-class hospitals have been able to share cost and quality metric data on a global scale. The project empowers healthcare professionals to analyse caseloads similar to their own, drilling all the way down to patient-level data. Members can compare mortality, length of stay, re-admission and complication rates across 259 clinical diagnoses and 38 clinical procedure groups, all across national borders.
University hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) is one of the project participants. It was able to compare its performance on heart attack patients with Yale New-Haven hospital in the US and saw that there could be room for improvement.
UHCW found its ambulance crews were only alerting the cardiology team as they were approaching the hospital, giving staff little time for preparation. Now, the ambulance crews trigger an alert as soon as they make the diagnosis of heart attack on the ECG, so that the cardiology team can be waiting for the patient to arrive in the emergency department. By studying how patients were managed in Yale New-Haven and adopting many of their methods, UHCW has achieved a 25% reduction rate in emergency patient mortality.
The first tentative findings from the global comparators project are now beginning to appear in academic journals. US hospitals are found to have had the lowest in-hospital mortality rates; but that is partly due to shorter lengths of stay. When mortality rates for stroke patients were compared including discharged patients, previous differences disappeared. US hospitals also had a higher 30-day re-admission rate than other participating hospitals – 9.4% compared with 6.6% in England and 4.9% in the other hospitals.
The Australian state of Victoria recently decided it would use these tools to understand healthcare performance across all of its hospitals, following the Australian government's announcement of a big data strategy. It is increasingly being realised that data itself means nothing if it's not trusted and acted upon – it's of no use being gathered but then sitting in a filing cabinet or on the cloud.
The use of data to drive improvements in performance is still in its relative infancy in the healthcare sector, but projects such as global comparators are setting the standard for what is achievable.
Thanks to the availability of data, patients around the world will continue to experience ever-greater improvements in the quality of care they receive.
This article is courtesy from The Guardian.
Monday, 25 November 2013
GP Negligence Claim Service Providers
There a number of patients in the United Kingdom who have received the wrong medical advice and treatment from their GP and community caregivers. Such affected patients lose faith with their long term GP care giver and look for an alternative. They can claim compensation for the wrong diagnoses and treatment provided by the GP caregiver. These claims fall under the category of personal injury medical negligence compensation claims. The affected patient has to make the compensation claim within a specific time period. The solicitor experienced in handling cases related to general practitioner medical or clinical negligence resulting in personal injury will be able to guide the affected patient in a timely manner.
Usually the accident solicitors would advise the affected patients to talk to their GP caregiver and find out the reason for the faulty treatment given. If the affected patient is not able to get the problem resolved, the solicitors experienced in handling personal injury claims would advise the client to go for a formal compliant. In order to make a compliant against the GP, the affected patient has to contact the practice manager. For complaining about a hospital, the patients or their family members need to establish contact with the complaints manager. As the GP caregiver will have the help of an experienced solicitor, the affected patient need to also go for an experienced personal injury solicitor. These experienced accident solicitors have helped a large number of affected parties to get their compensation claims.
The delay in diagnoses or wrong diagnoses has often resulted in the patient suffering badly. In one such case, a woman was admitted to a hospital for the injuries suffered in a fall. A nurse and a doctor examined her and despite the presence of three fractures in the radial portion of head, distal radius and the thumb portion the doctor failed to identify the fracture. The GP caregiver also didn’t advise the affected person to go for X-ray scanning. By the time the fractures were identified, the situation had gotten out of control and the patient’s injury problems worsened. She couldn’t get out of her bed for the next two months. The affected patient was not able to do even daily house hold tasks such as knitting and driving. She couldn’t go for work and was on loss of pay. The patient then took the help of a renowned clinical negligence solicitor and got compensation worth 110,000 pounds for the clinical negligence shown by the GP caregiver and the nurses employed with the clinic.
Usually the accident solicitors would advise the affected patients to talk to their GP caregiver and find out the reason for the faulty treatment given. If the affected patient is not able to get the problem resolved, the solicitors experienced in handling personal injury claims would advise the client to go for a formal compliant. In order to make a compliant against the GP, the affected patient has to contact the practice manager. For complaining about a hospital, the patients or their family members need to establish contact with the complaints manager. As the GP caregiver will have the help of an experienced solicitor, the affected patient need to also go for an experienced personal injury solicitor. These experienced accident solicitors have helped a large number of affected parties to get their compensation claims.
The delay in diagnoses or wrong diagnoses has often resulted in the patient suffering badly. In one such case, a woman was admitted to a hospital for the injuries suffered in a fall. A nurse and a doctor examined her and despite the presence of three fractures in the radial portion of head, distal radius and the thumb portion the doctor failed to identify the fracture. The GP caregiver also didn’t advise the affected person to go for X-ray scanning. By the time the fractures were identified, the situation had gotten out of control and the patient’s injury problems worsened. She couldn’t get out of her bed for the next two months. The affected patient was not able to do even daily house hold tasks such as knitting and driving. She couldn’t go for work and was on loss of pay. The patient then took the help of a renowned clinical negligence solicitor and got compensation worth 110,000 pounds for the clinical negligence shown by the GP caregiver and the nurses employed with the clinic.
Saturday, 23 November 2013
UK doctors and nurses to face jail for negligence
Doctors and nurses found guilty of 'wilful neglect' could face up to five years in jail under new legal measures to be introduced in the wake of the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust scandal.
The law is to be unveiled by UK Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Tuesday, and is expected to be one of a range that will be announced to deter malpractice and boost transparency.
Speaking from Sri Lanka, Prime Minister David Cameron said: "The NHS is full of brilliant doctors, nurses and other health workers who dedicate their lives to caring for our loved ones.
"But Mid-Staffordshire hospital showed that sometimes the standard of care is not good enough. That is why we have taken a number of different steps that will improve patient care and improve how we spot bad practice.
"Never again will we allow substandard care, cruelty or neglect to go unnoticed."
The legal penalty was among the recommendations made by a senior academic who was asked to suggest ways to improve patient safety after a report supervised by Robert Francis QC found that patients in Mid-Staffordshire were left thirsty and in dirty conditions, causing "appalling and unnecessary suffering of hundreds of people".
Professor Don Berwick, a former adviser to US President Barack Obama, recommended new criminal penalties for "leaders who have acted wilfully, recklessly, or with a 'couldn't care less' attitude and whose behaviour causes avoidable death or serious harm".
Police were able to bring a successful prosecution against the Mid-Staffordshire trust on health and safety grounds following the death of 66-year-old Gillian Astbury, a diabetic patient who was not given insulin and lapsed into a fatal coma at the hospital.
The trust last month pleaded guilty to failing to ensure Astbury's safety.
The law is to be discussed by Department of Health officials in the coming months, and may be put to public consultation.
It is believed to be modelled on a law introduced under the 2005 Mental Capacity Act, under which negligent care workers can be punished with up to five years in jail.
Medical unions and organisations have attacked the law, claiming it could create a climate of fear under which professional negligence would be less likely to be reported by colleagues. They called for staffing levels to be boosted in line with another of Professor Berwick's recommendations.
Dr Andrew Collier, co-chairman of the BMA's junior doctors' committee, told the BBC that doctors "don't need this new climate of fear. They don't need to be concerned that they may be sent to jail. What they need to do is learn from their mistakes and develop their practice."
Peter Carter, general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said a law change on its own was "not a panacea".
He said that legally enforcing staffing levels would be a more effective way of improving standards, as recent cases in Australia and California showed.
The Guardian reports that while front-line care staff have been successfully prosecuted under the 2005 law, senior managers and social care organisations had not.
Shortly after Berwick's report, Dr Mark Porter, chair of council at the British Medical Association, called for authorities to "encourage openness" and support whistleblowers.
"There is an answer to this, and that is to act against the bully, not the bullied. It is to build on the professional duty to speak out by placing a duty on healthcare organisations to listen. Active listening, as often happens, not hands over the ears, as sometimes, appallingly, happens," he said.
This article is courtesy from the International Business Times.
The law is to be unveiled by UK Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Tuesday, and is expected to be one of a range that will be announced to deter malpractice and boost transparency.
Speaking from Sri Lanka, Prime Minister David Cameron said: "The NHS is full of brilliant doctors, nurses and other health workers who dedicate their lives to caring for our loved ones.
"But Mid-Staffordshire hospital showed that sometimes the standard of care is not good enough. That is why we have taken a number of different steps that will improve patient care and improve how we spot bad practice.
"Never again will we allow substandard care, cruelty or neglect to go unnoticed."
The legal penalty was among the recommendations made by a senior academic who was asked to suggest ways to improve patient safety after a report supervised by Robert Francis QC found that patients in Mid-Staffordshire were left thirsty and in dirty conditions, causing "appalling and unnecessary suffering of hundreds of people".
Professor Don Berwick, a former adviser to US President Barack Obama, recommended new criminal penalties for "leaders who have acted wilfully, recklessly, or with a 'couldn't care less' attitude and whose behaviour causes avoidable death or serious harm".
Police were able to bring a successful prosecution against the Mid-Staffordshire trust on health and safety grounds following the death of 66-year-old Gillian Astbury, a diabetic patient who was not given insulin and lapsed into a fatal coma at the hospital.
The trust last month pleaded guilty to failing to ensure Astbury's safety.
The law is to be discussed by Department of Health officials in the coming months, and may be put to public consultation.
It is believed to be modelled on a law introduced under the 2005 Mental Capacity Act, under which negligent care workers can be punished with up to five years in jail.
Medical unions and organisations have attacked the law, claiming it could create a climate of fear under which professional negligence would be less likely to be reported by colleagues. They called for staffing levels to be boosted in line with another of Professor Berwick's recommendations.
Dr Andrew Collier, co-chairman of the BMA's junior doctors' committee, told the BBC that doctors "don't need this new climate of fear. They don't need to be concerned that they may be sent to jail. What they need to do is learn from their mistakes and develop their practice."
Peter Carter, general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said a law change on its own was "not a panacea".
He said that legally enforcing staffing levels would be a more effective way of improving standards, as recent cases in Australia and California showed.
The Guardian reports that while front-line care staff have been successfully prosecuted under the 2005 law, senior managers and social care organisations had not.
Shortly after Berwick's report, Dr Mark Porter, chair of council at the British Medical Association, called for authorities to "encourage openness" and support whistleblowers.
"There is an answer to this, and that is to act against the bully, not the bullied. It is to build on the professional duty to speak out by placing a duty on healthcare organisations to listen. Active listening, as often happens, not hands over the ears, as sometimes, appallingly, happens," he said.
This article is courtesy from the International Business Times.
Friday, 22 November 2013
Surgical Errors Can Cause Dramatic Health and Financial Consequences
Surgical errors are among the most costly medical negligence cases in terms of their impact on one’s health and financial consequences. Medical negligence can be defined as any type of physical or emotional harm that may occur as a result of misdiagnosis, incorrectly implemented medical procedures or failure to act on time when the situation requires emergency medical attention, among several other circumstances in which the medical staff is not performing on an adequate level. Individuals who suffered from physical pain, trauma, collateral medical conditions or emotional distress as a result of surgical errors are advised to partner with an experienced solicitor to take their case to court and obtain a solid compensation for the suffered consequences. A UK-based solicitor with a superb service record and a long list of satisfied clients is ready to evaluate any medical negligence case no matter the complexity and handle all the associated paperwork before and during court proceedings.
Statistical Data Shows an Alarming Trend
Statistic data in the UK reveals a surprising negative trend. On average, about 11 serious surgical errors happen every single day in NHS-funded medical facilities. It is a very concerning number because most victims of such medical negligence cases don’t seek legal help to get compensations for their physical distress, emotional pain or medical conditions they developed as a result of the surgical mistake. The wisest thing to do in such a situation is to hire an experienced solicitor who possesses solid knowledge of all the legal intricacies and can navigate through the legal system to help the victim obtain financial compensation.
Common Types of Surgical Errors
What type of surgical mistakes can occur during surgical interventions? Excessive bleeding as a result of incorrect administration of blood thinners or anticoagulants is a common medical mistake. The surgeon must accurately evaluate the patient before the surgery and make sure that he or she is not taking blood thinners, because they can cause dangerous bleeding accidents during the surgery, which are very difficult to stop.
Pieces of surgical material left accidentally inside the body of a patient is a very severe occurrence that often can cause dramatic medical problems if left uncorrected.
Failure to evaluate the eligibility of a patient for a particular surgery is also a common medical negligence issue. For example, individuals with severe heart failure, those who are susceptible to seizures or allergic to anesthetics may not be eligible for surgery, which is a circumstance that needs to be accurately evaluated prior to the surgery.
Victims of surgical errors are encouraged to seek the help of an experienced solicitor to discuss the opportunity of legal action.
Statistical Data Shows an Alarming Trend
Statistic data in the UK reveals a surprising negative trend. On average, about 11 serious surgical errors happen every single day in NHS-funded medical facilities. It is a very concerning number because most victims of such medical negligence cases don’t seek legal help to get compensations for their physical distress, emotional pain or medical conditions they developed as a result of the surgical mistake. The wisest thing to do in such a situation is to hire an experienced solicitor who possesses solid knowledge of all the legal intricacies and can navigate through the legal system to help the victim obtain financial compensation.
Common Types of Surgical Errors
What type of surgical mistakes can occur during surgical interventions? Excessive bleeding as a result of incorrect administration of blood thinners or anticoagulants is a common medical mistake. The surgeon must accurately evaluate the patient before the surgery and make sure that he or she is not taking blood thinners, because they can cause dangerous bleeding accidents during the surgery, which are very difficult to stop.
Pieces of surgical material left accidentally inside the body of a patient is a very severe occurrence that often can cause dramatic medical problems if left uncorrected.
Failure to evaluate the eligibility of a patient for a particular surgery is also a common medical negligence issue. For example, individuals with severe heart failure, those who are susceptible to seizures or allergic to anesthetics may not be eligible for surgery, which is a circumstance that needs to be accurately evaluated prior to the surgery.
Victims of surgical errors are encouraged to seek the help of an experienced solicitor to discuss the opportunity of legal action.
Wednesday, 20 November 2013
NHS spends £700 on negligence cover for every birth
The NHS spends nearly £700 on clinical negligence cover for every live birth in England, a report says.
The review by the National Audit Office said last year this cost nearly £500m - almost a fifth of all spending on maternity.
Public Accounts Committee chairwoman Margaret Hodge said the figure was "absolutely scandalous".
The Department of Health said the NHS is one of the safest places in the world to have a baby.
Having a baby is the most common reason for admission to hospital in England.
The number of births has increased by almost a quarter in the last decade, reaching nearly 700,000 live births.
The public spending watchdog said maternity services were generally good for women and babies, but there was still a lot of scope for improvement.
Its report highlighted "wide unexplained variations" between trusts in rates of complications such as readmissions, injuries and infections.
Laura Blackwell, director of health value for money studies at the National Audit Office, told the BBC the number of maternity claims had risen significantly in recent years.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, she said: "There has been an increase in claims and we don't cover exactly why. It is the same across the NHS.
"I think it's a complicated picture... further complicated by the fact it takes an average of four years for a claim to be settled... so it's quite hard to draw conclusions about the current state of care."
Clinical negligence
The NAO also pointed to a shortage of midwives and consultants on labour wards. The report concluded that a further 2,300 midwives are required, though their distribution across England varies substantially.
And although it said the level of consultant presence has improved, more than half of units are not meeting the standard recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
The report noted that between April and September last year more than a quarter of maternity units were closed to admissions for at least half a day because demand outstripped capacity.
Clinical negligence claims for maternity have risen by 80% in the last five years. The cost of cover last year was £482m, and the average payment per claim was £277,000.
Figures from the NHS Litigation Authority released last year showed the health service in England paid out more than £3bn in compensation claims linked to maternity care between 2000 and 2010.
Ms Hodge said: "I find it absolutely scandalous that one fifth of all funding for maternity services, equivalent to around £700 per birth, is spent on clinical negligence cover."
She said the NAO report had shown an urgent need to improve maternity services.
"The department needs to buck up and take responsibility for this. It needs to review its monitoring and reporting process to ensure that all relevant bodies can work effectively together to deliver maternity services that are value for money and fit for purpose."
James (not his real name), a recipient of medical negligence money, told the Today programme the money had helped give his son a better quality of life.
He and his wife did not claim for negligence until six months after the birth of their son, when they realised the costs involved in his care. Their son had been starved of oxygen during birth and now suffers from quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe brain damage, visual impairment and epilepsy.
Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said the health service should always learn from any mistakes to improve patient care in the future.
"The NHS remains one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, but on rare occasions care falls below acceptable standards and unsafe care should never be tolerated."
He said the service was making progress.
"This report shows that most women have good outcomes and positive experiences of maternity care. We know 84% of women now say they have good care, which has gone up from 75% six years ago. But we are determined to improve further."
Royal College of Midwives chief executive Cathy Warwick said the report backed up what the college had been saying for a long time.
"We are many thousands of midwives short of the number needed to deliver safe, high quality care. Births are at a 40-year high and other figures out this week show that this is set to continue. As the report states, births are also becoming increasingly complex putting even more demands on midwives and maternity services."
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists president Dr David Richmond said the NAO report raised valid concerns.
"Although the UK is generally a safe place for women to give birth, we have known for some time that pressure on maternity services is growing in some areas, particularly inner city conurbations, placing stress on clinicians, managers and patients alike."
This article is courtesy from The BBC.
The review by the National Audit Office said last year this cost nearly £500m - almost a fifth of all spending on maternity.
Public Accounts Committee chairwoman Margaret Hodge said the figure was "absolutely scandalous".
The Department of Health said the NHS is one of the safest places in the world to have a baby.
Having a baby is the most common reason for admission to hospital in England.
The number of births has increased by almost a quarter in the last decade, reaching nearly 700,000 live births.
The public spending watchdog said maternity services were generally good for women and babies, but there was still a lot of scope for improvement.
Its report highlighted "wide unexplained variations" between trusts in rates of complications such as readmissions, injuries and infections.
Laura Blackwell, director of health value for money studies at the National Audit Office, told the BBC the number of maternity claims had risen significantly in recent years.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, she said: "There has been an increase in claims and we don't cover exactly why. It is the same across the NHS.
"I think it's a complicated picture... further complicated by the fact it takes an average of four years for a claim to be settled... so it's quite hard to draw conclusions about the current state of care."
Clinical negligence
The NAO also pointed to a shortage of midwives and consultants on labour wards. The report concluded that a further 2,300 midwives are required, though their distribution across England varies substantially.
And although it said the level of consultant presence has improved, more than half of units are not meeting the standard recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
The report noted that between April and September last year more than a quarter of maternity units were closed to admissions for at least half a day because demand outstripped capacity.
Clinical negligence claims for maternity have risen by 80% in the last five years. The cost of cover last year was £482m, and the average payment per claim was £277,000.
Figures from the NHS Litigation Authority released last year showed the health service in England paid out more than £3bn in compensation claims linked to maternity care between 2000 and 2010.
Ms Hodge said: "I find it absolutely scandalous that one fifth of all funding for maternity services, equivalent to around £700 per birth, is spent on clinical negligence cover."
She said the NAO report had shown an urgent need to improve maternity services.
"The department needs to buck up and take responsibility for this. It needs to review its monitoring and reporting process to ensure that all relevant bodies can work effectively together to deliver maternity services that are value for money and fit for purpose."
James (not his real name), a recipient of medical negligence money, told the Today programme the money had helped give his son a better quality of life.
He and his wife did not claim for negligence until six months after the birth of their son, when they realised the costs involved in his care. Their son had been starved of oxygen during birth and now suffers from quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe brain damage, visual impairment and epilepsy.
Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said the health service should always learn from any mistakes to improve patient care in the future.
"The NHS remains one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, but on rare occasions care falls below acceptable standards and unsafe care should never be tolerated."
He said the service was making progress.
"This report shows that most women have good outcomes and positive experiences of maternity care. We know 84% of women now say they have good care, which has gone up from 75% six years ago. But we are determined to improve further."
Royal College of Midwives chief executive Cathy Warwick said the report backed up what the college had been saying for a long time.
"We are many thousands of midwives short of the number needed to deliver safe, high quality care. Births are at a 40-year high and other figures out this week show that this is set to continue. As the report states, births are also becoming increasingly complex putting even more demands on midwives and maternity services."
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists president Dr David Richmond said the NAO report raised valid concerns.
"Although the UK is generally a safe place for women to give birth, we have known for some time that pressure on maternity services is growing in some areas, particularly inner city conurbations, placing stress on clinicians, managers and patients alike."
This article is courtesy from The BBC.
Monday, 18 November 2013
Head injuries from driving on the road
Head or brain injuries are probably the most serious and life-changing, along with back or spinal damage. The effects of a blow to the head can range from relatively mild concussion, blurred vision and dizziness, through memory loss, altered personality and cognitive impairment, to loss of speech, vision or movement and severe brain damage.
In the more extreme cases of head and brain trauma, the victim is unlikely to be able to work again while becoming dependant on others and having to pay for additional, on-going nursing care, rehabilitation, disability aids or specialist transportation. In these circumstances the settlement will be for significant sums of money in order to compensate the claimant for the rest of their life.
On the roads
One of the most common causes of head injuries, potentially leading to brain damage, is an accident on the road. Pedestrians are sometimes the most vulnerable to reckless drivers as they cannot move out of harm’s way fast and they have no protection. A speeding driver, perhaps on the wrong side of the road, can take a pedestrian unaware within seconds and a collision at any speed will knock someone over. If the car is exceeding the town speed limit, it is likely to send the person flying into the air, over the vehicle and landing on their back or head causing severe injuries, if not death.
However the damage is not likely to be much less if the collision is with a cyclist, and even if they are wearing a helmet they can sustain significant brain injury from being thrown forcibly from their bike. When two cars crash the drivers and passengers are more protected, but the whiplash action can still cause serious damage to the brain, even if they appear to emerge unscathed from cuts and bruises.
Medical negligence
There are other, less obvious ways you might be affected by brain injuries while in hospital. A simple misdiagnosis or failure to spot something on an x-ray can lead to serious consequences if a tumour, haemorrhage, epilepsy, stroke or meningitis is later discovered.
You might rely on oxygen, either while undergoing surgery or as part of your treatment, and if the supply is faulty for any reason you can suffer severe brain damage. Equally, an overdose of medication could cause the brain to swell temporarily which could have a have lasting impact. If midwives or doctors delivering a baby don’t notice that there is a problem, asphyxiation during birth can result in cerebral palsy.
In the more extreme cases of head and brain trauma, the victim is unlikely to be able to work again while becoming dependant on others and having to pay for additional, on-going nursing care, rehabilitation, disability aids or specialist transportation. In these circumstances the settlement will be for significant sums of money in order to compensate the claimant for the rest of their life.
On the roads
One of the most common causes of head injuries, potentially leading to brain damage, is an accident on the road. Pedestrians are sometimes the most vulnerable to reckless drivers as they cannot move out of harm’s way fast and they have no protection. A speeding driver, perhaps on the wrong side of the road, can take a pedestrian unaware within seconds and a collision at any speed will knock someone over. If the car is exceeding the town speed limit, it is likely to send the person flying into the air, over the vehicle and landing on their back or head causing severe injuries, if not death.
However the damage is not likely to be much less if the collision is with a cyclist, and even if they are wearing a helmet they can sustain significant brain injury from being thrown forcibly from their bike. When two cars crash the drivers and passengers are more protected, but the whiplash action can still cause serious damage to the brain, even if they appear to emerge unscathed from cuts and bruises.
Medical negligence
There are other, less obvious ways you might be affected by brain injuries while in hospital. A simple misdiagnosis or failure to spot something on an x-ray can lead to serious consequences if a tumour, haemorrhage, epilepsy, stroke or meningitis is later discovered.
You might rely on oxygen, either while undergoing surgery or as part of your treatment, and if the supply is faulty for any reason you can suffer severe brain damage. Equally, an overdose of medication could cause the brain to swell temporarily which could have a have lasting impact. If midwives or doctors delivering a baby don’t notice that there is a problem, asphyxiation during birth can result in cerebral palsy.
Should the NHS listen to clinical negligence lawyers?
The widely publicised NAO report highlighted the NHS maternity budget spent on negligence cover. Once again an easy narrative will be to portray claimant-representing clinical negligence lawyers, such as myself, as the villains of the piece.
I recently spoke at the Faculty of Medical Leadership and Management's annual conference on this very topic asking "what is the point of lawyers?" The aim of my talk was to challenge the way clinical negligence lawyers are perceived by the medical profession and to call for a more constructive working relationship.
My personal aspiration is that we are seen not as the enemy, depriving the NHS of resources and inhibiting good leadership, but as a necessary part of the process leading to improvement. I strongly believe clinical negligence lawyers can help in healing trust in the NHS.
Damaged, usually upset, sometimes angry people come to my team when they take issue with the care that has been provided to them or a member of their family. My team hears firsthand of bad patient experiences. We can, in turn, make a positive contribution to highlighting problems and helping to prevent a repeat of mistakes.
My job is not to engender a culture of blame. In a clinical negligence case there is no "guilty verdict". Few cases actually go to trial and when they do there is no jury. There are no powers to strike off. Misconceptions have arisen such that some medics believe that a negligence claim can be a career-ending event. The truth is that 97% of negligence claims are settled without a "day in court". And actually only a tiny fraction of medical situations that go wrong actually result in a clinical negligence claim.
I believe that the NHS could do more to deal with these failures better.
Trust between the organisation and the public they serve will be improved if it is known that the NHS learns from its mistakes by listening to and involving the injured patient. Lawyers can and should be part of that process. Highlighting the patient voice via the legal system can ultimately help to restore that trust.
I do see some positives. Good medical leadership influences legal outcomes. Serious untoward incident reporting is increasingly commonplace and is helpful. There are situations where a member of the treating team has said "see a lawyer". In the current climate that is courageous.
Unsurprisingly, I believe in the need for an organisational duty of candour. Patients want to be informed but, also, my sense is that many medics want to be open too. Again lawyers can help mediate this process. Admitting mistakes is a good thing. In an open and accountable NHS, mistakes should be learned from, not feared.
A junior doctor wrote a year ago in the Guardian "I feel as if I am in the middle of a brutal initiation rite but, of course I cannot let my patient see that … so I am thinking, am I really up to this? Hello, is there anyone around who can help me?"
The challenge for the NHS is to remove the fear of mistake and isolation, to create a supportive health service where it is permissible to be fallible, provided errors are swiftly acknowledged and learned from.
In a complex environment such as the NHS, mistakes will happen and, tragically, lives lost. My hope is that, with strong leadership and a willingness to learn from mistakes and look at them in an open and transparent way, repeated, avoidable and obvious failures become a thing of the past. This will help reduce negligence budgets too.
Lawyers serve the same public as medics and by highlighting the patient voice, we too have a part to play in creating a patient focused, high quality, transparent healthcare system.
I recently spoke at the Faculty of Medical Leadership and Management's annual conference on this very topic asking "what is the point of lawyers?" The aim of my talk was to challenge the way clinical negligence lawyers are perceived by the medical profession and to call for a more constructive working relationship.
My personal aspiration is that we are seen not as the enemy, depriving the NHS of resources and inhibiting good leadership, but as a necessary part of the process leading to improvement. I strongly believe clinical negligence lawyers can help in healing trust in the NHS.
Damaged, usually upset, sometimes angry people come to my team when they take issue with the care that has been provided to them or a member of their family. My team hears firsthand of bad patient experiences. We can, in turn, make a positive contribution to highlighting problems and helping to prevent a repeat of mistakes.
My job is not to engender a culture of blame. In a clinical negligence case there is no "guilty verdict". Few cases actually go to trial and when they do there is no jury. There are no powers to strike off. Misconceptions have arisen such that some medics believe that a negligence claim can be a career-ending event. The truth is that 97% of negligence claims are settled without a "day in court". And actually only a tiny fraction of medical situations that go wrong actually result in a clinical negligence claim.
I believe that the NHS could do more to deal with these failures better.
Trust between the organisation and the public they serve will be improved if it is known that the NHS learns from its mistakes by listening to and involving the injured patient. Lawyers can and should be part of that process. Highlighting the patient voice via the legal system can ultimately help to restore that trust.
I do see some positives. Good medical leadership influences legal outcomes. Serious untoward incident reporting is increasingly commonplace and is helpful. There are situations where a member of the treating team has said "see a lawyer". In the current climate that is courageous.
Unsurprisingly, I believe in the need for an organisational duty of candour. Patients want to be informed but, also, my sense is that many medics want to be open too. Again lawyers can help mediate this process. Admitting mistakes is a good thing. In an open and accountable NHS, mistakes should be learned from, not feared.
A junior doctor wrote a year ago in the Guardian "I feel as if I am in the middle of a brutal initiation rite but, of course I cannot let my patient see that … so I am thinking, am I really up to this? Hello, is there anyone around who can help me?"
The challenge for the NHS is to remove the fear of mistake and isolation, to create a supportive health service where it is permissible to be fallible, provided errors are swiftly acknowledged and learned from.
In a complex environment such as the NHS, mistakes will happen and, tragically, lives lost. My hope is that, with strong leadership and a willingness to learn from mistakes and look at them in an open and transparent way, repeated, avoidable and obvious failures become a thing of the past. This will help reduce negligence budgets too.
Lawyers serve the same public as medics and by highlighting the patient voice, we too have a part to play in creating a patient focused, high quality, transparent healthcare system.
This article is courtesy from The Guardian.
Friday, 15 November 2013
Cosmetic surgery – Time for new regulation?
Thank you to Curtis Law Solicitors for this guest post.
Cosmetic surgery and procedures have featured heavily in the media over the past months, with a vast increase of clinical negligence claims hitting the headlines.
More than six months ago, the Keogh review into cosmetic surgery developed a list of recommendations intended to improve the current industry in a hope to avoid what they described as a ‘crisis waiting to happen’.
The use of what are called ‘injectables’ including botox, dermal fillers and tanning agents, are barely regulated within the industry and are estimated to account for 90% of treatments and 75% of the industry’s turnover (Source:Mintel).
The treatments, described earlier this year by Sir Keogh as having “no more protection and redress than someone buying a ball point pen or a toothbrush”, allow almost anyone to administer these procedures with little or no training. Facial procedures can be completed at shopping centres, gyms and even parties at home.
Professionals have called for greater regulations to protect those choosing to use these services, but has this had any impact?
Advertising practices in the industry were called ‘highly misleading’ and little has been done to change this. Clinics are still found to be offering perks and package deals such as reducing pricing for referrals and offering surgery as a competition prize, despite Keogh recommending that these ‘socially irresponsible’ advertisements be banned.
“Dermal fillers, facial peels and toning fall into the non surgical procedures category. This also applies to laser hair, mole and varicose vein removal. It means that these techniques can be performed by non-medically qualified people at all types of venue. Because of this procedures are generally not as safe as they could be and are quite often uninsured. The majority of people using these services are unaware of this and not warned by the provider” Jerard Knott, Head of Clinical Negligence said.
“The treatments can lead to significant injury and complication when they go wrong, and the unqualified provider is only able to call the emergency services meaning that the immediate treatment required is not available,” he added.
“Greater regulation can only be a positive move” Jerard concluded.
A successful procedure has the ability to drastically improve a person’s self esteem, but the health complications resulting from botched procedures can ultimately put someone’s life at risk. If you’ve suffered cosmetic surgery negligence or are suffering pain or discomfort following a procedure and are looking to make a claim, contact Jerard Knott free on 0800 0087450.
Cosmetic surgery and procedures have featured heavily in the media over the past months, with a vast increase of clinical negligence claims hitting the headlines.
More than six months ago, the Keogh review into cosmetic surgery developed a list of recommendations intended to improve the current industry in a hope to avoid what they described as a ‘crisis waiting to happen’.
The use of what are called ‘injectables’ including botox, dermal fillers and tanning agents, are barely regulated within the industry and are estimated to account for 90% of treatments and 75% of the industry’s turnover (Source:Mintel).
The treatments, described earlier this year by Sir Keogh as having “no more protection and redress than someone buying a ball point pen or a toothbrush”, allow almost anyone to administer these procedures with little or no training. Facial procedures can be completed at shopping centres, gyms and even parties at home.
Professionals have called for greater regulations to protect those choosing to use these services, but has this had any impact?
Advertising practices in the industry were called ‘highly misleading’ and little has been done to change this. Clinics are still found to be offering perks and package deals such as reducing pricing for referrals and offering surgery as a competition prize, despite Keogh recommending that these ‘socially irresponsible’ advertisements be banned.
“Dermal fillers, facial peels and toning fall into the non surgical procedures category. This also applies to laser hair, mole and varicose vein removal. It means that these techniques can be performed by non-medically qualified people at all types of venue. Because of this procedures are generally not as safe as they could be and are quite often uninsured. The majority of people using these services are unaware of this and not warned by the provider” Jerard Knott, Head of Clinical Negligence said.
“The treatments can lead to significant injury and complication when they go wrong, and the unqualified provider is only able to call the emergency services meaning that the immediate treatment required is not available,” he added.
“Greater regulation can only be a positive move” Jerard concluded.
A successful procedure has the ability to drastically improve a person’s self esteem, but the health complications resulting from botched procedures can ultimately put someone’s life at risk. If you’ve suffered cosmetic surgery negligence or are suffering pain or discomfort following a procedure and are looking to make a claim, contact Jerard Knott free on 0800 0087450.
Tuesday, 12 November 2013
Why should the NHS pay compensation for Clinical Negligence?
When you take a car to a mechanic you expect the work to be done to a certain standard.
If, say, the brakes are replaced, and on the way home they failed causing you to have an accident, you would probably not think twice about making a claim against the mechanic. So why is it that many of us are sensitive about suing a hospital or a doctor?
Is it because we still put doctors on a pedestal?
Perhaps we feel squeamish claiming compensation from what is, effectively, taxpayers’ money? Or is it simply the case that it has never happened to you?
We often hear people discussing the so-called ‘compensation culture’ and the fact that compensation settlements are too high.
The fact is, however, that purely compensatory payments within the UK are extremely low.
For example a young girl, Amy, suffers a severe brain injury as a result of medical negligence. In successfully suing the hospital she is likely to be awarded approximately £250,000 in terms of the purely compensatory award for her injury, for the pain, suffering and loss of amenity that she has suffered, and will suffer for the remainder of her life, as a result of her brain injury.
Effectively, it compensates Amy for the fact that she will never lead an independent life.
However, in reality, Amy’s award for compensation is likely to reach millions of pounds. Amy will never lead what we perceive to be a ‘normal’ life. She will never work, she will always require care, she will never be able to bathe herself, take care of her personal hygiene or drive a car. All the things that many of us take for granted.
Her claim will, therefore, include the cost of private care for the remainder of her life, any therapies required to improve her cognitive or physical functioning, aids and equipment such as wheelchairs and adaptations to her home or appropriate accommodation. So, in reality, the high award of damages is to provide Amy with the opportunity to live as independent and fulfilling a life as possible, to restore her as far as we can to her pre-accident condition.
Lest we forget, Amy would not have had this brain injury at all but for the hospital’s negligence and, where there has been a failure of care, the law quite properly provides a right to damages.
If, say, the brakes are replaced, and on the way home they failed causing you to have an accident, you would probably not think twice about making a claim against the mechanic. So why is it that many of us are sensitive about suing a hospital or a doctor?
Is it because we still put doctors on a pedestal?
Perhaps we feel squeamish claiming compensation from what is, effectively, taxpayers’ money? Or is it simply the case that it has never happened to you?
We often hear people discussing the so-called ‘compensation culture’ and the fact that compensation settlements are too high.
The fact is, however, that purely compensatory payments within the UK are extremely low.
For example a young girl, Amy, suffers a severe brain injury as a result of medical negligence. In successfully suing the hospital she is likely to be awarded approximately £250,000 in terms of the purely compensatory award for her injury, for the pain, suffering and loss of amenity that she has suffered, and will suffer for the remainder of her life, as a result of her brain injury.
Effectively, it compensates Amy for the fact that she will never lead an independent life.
However, in reality, Amy’s award for compensation is likely to reach millions of pounds. Amy will never lead what we perceive to be a ‘normal’ life. She will never work, she will always require care, she will never be able to bathe herself, take care of her personal hygiene or drive a car. All the things that many of us take for granted.
Her claim will, therefore, include the cost of private care for the remainder of her life, any therapies required to improve her cognitive or physical functioning, aids and equipment such as wheelchairs and adaptations to her home or appropriate accommodation. So, in reality, the high award of damages is to provide Amy with the opportunity to live as independent and fulfilling a life as possible, to restore her as far as we can to her pre-accident condition.
Lest we forget, Amy would not have had this brain injury at all but for the hospital’s negligence and, where there has been a failure of care, the law quite properly provides a right to damages.
This article is courtesy from the Ipswich Star
Monday, 11 November 2013
Why Do Medical Negligence Claim Take Long?
Accidents are very common nowadays; most accidents are the result of the negligence of a person. Accidents occur anywhere, so in hospitals as well. It is a much worse situation when you have a critical health condition due to the negligence of a doctor on your medication. Similar to all other accident claims, you are also free to make a medical negligence claim as the compensation for your sufferings as well as to support you in further medication as well as living costs.
You should always have a knowledge about anything which you are about to commit, thus you also should know about the medical negligence claim before making your progress to claim one. It is a common fact that medical negligence usually a long time to end. Knowing about the causes and the solutions can always help you.
Medical Negligence Claim
Once you encounter with a bad health condition due to the negligence of a doctor, you are supposedly to make a claim. Usually the claim is made against the clinic that employees the doctor who treated you, as they bear the responsibility for their employees. The claim should be brought up within the three years of negligent treatment. Bringing the case forward to court once you realise the fault in the treatment can help you to make the claim earlier.
A medical negligence claim is made against a qualified doctor and the related institute, thus the claiming the compensation involves many legal hindrances which also can result in cancellation of the medical license so it usually takes more time.
What Involves in Medical Negligence Cases?
The medical negligence claim is no ordinary claim process where you have to produce the record, reports and witness in order to claim the compensation; this claim involves several authorities including the hospitals. Once you realise the type of mistake made by a doctor, you have to contact your solicitor to make all the legal arrangements. It is important to have the necessary evidence to produce showing the fault of the doctor. This cannot be done alone without a solicitor as well as a medical professional.
Medical professionals can help you identify the fault in treatment, providing you the proper treatment and gather evidence for the fault treatment. This usually takes more time than you expect, as sometimes though the medical professionals identify your problem and treat you, identifying the mistake made takes more time. However the time for making the claim also depends on the type of medical negligence as well as the age of the victim in the claim case.
Hiring a Solicitor
Medical negligence claim being a very complex claim case involving complex processes it is always better for you to hire an expert medical negligence solicitor. With the assistance of the solicitor you can make sure all the necessary legal procedure are done on time as well as gathering the solid evidence for the claim case.
Author Bio
With the experience of supporting several clients in claiming compensation, Joseph Cohen has good knowledge of the claiming system. Thus he shares his view about medical negligence experience for you to have an idea.
You should always have a knowledge about anything which you are about to commit, thus you also should know about the medical negligence claim before making your progress to claim one. It is a common fact that medical negligence usually a long time to end. Knowing about the causes and the solutions can always help you.
Medical Negligence Claim
Once you encounter with a bad health condition due to the negligence of a doctor, you are supposedly to make a claim. Usually the claim is made against the clinic that employees the doctor who treated you, as they bear the responsibility for their employees. The claim should be brought up within the three years of negligent treatment. Bringing the case forward to court once you realise the fault in the treatment can help you to make the claim earlier.
A medical negligence claim is made against a qualified doctor and the related institute, thus the claiming the compensation involves many legal hindrances which also can result in cancellation of the medical license so it usually takes more time.
What Involves in Medical Negligence Cases?
The medical negligence claim is no ordinary claim process where you have to produce the record, reports and witness in order to claim the compensation; this claim involves several authorities including the hospitals. Once you realise the type of mistake made by a doctor, you have to contact your solicitor to make all the legal arrangements. It is important to have the necessary evidence to produce showing the fault of the doctor. This cannot be done alone without a solicitor as well as a medical professional.
Medical professionals can help you identify the fault in treatment, providing you the proper treatment and gather evidence for the fault treatment. This usually takes more time than you expect, as sometimes though the medical professionals identify your problem and treat you, identifying the mistake made takes more time. However the time for making the claim also depends on the type of medical negligence as well as the age of the victim in the claim case.
Hiring a Solicitor
Medical negligence claim being a very complex claim case involving complex processes it is always better for you to hire an expert medical negligence solicitor. With the assistance of the solicitor you can make sure all the necessary legal procedure are done on time as well as gathering the solid evidence for the claim case.
Author Bio
With the experience of supporting several clients in claiming compensation, Joseph Cohen has good knowledge of the claiming system. Thus he shares his view about medical negligence experience for you to have an idea.
Sunday, 10 November 2013
Sheffield hospitals’ £8m baby claims bill
Clinical negligence claims launched over maternity care blunders in Sheffield cost more than £8 million last year, NHS figures have revealed.
The statistics were highlighted in an official report by the National Audit Office, which said that on average nearly £700 is spent on clinical negligence insurance cover for every live birth in England.
Last year there were 12 claims made against the trust linked to botched maternity care.
In 2012/13, claims over obstetrics treatment at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust - which runs the city’s Jessop Wing maternity hospital - cost £5.2m, while £3.3m was paid in compensation and legal expenses through a scheme dealing with claims dating from before 1995.
But Chris Morley, deputy chief nurse at the trust, said the cost of its clinical negligence cover had fallen by nearly half over the past year.
Nationwide, obstetrics-related claims have risen by 80 per cent in the past five years, the audit report said. The cost of cover last year was £482m, and the average payment per claim was £277,000.
The health service in England paid out more than £3bn in compensation claims linked to maternity care between 2000 and 2010, according to the NHS Litigation Authority, which published the Sheffield figures.
Mr Morley said: “Over the last 12 months the cost of our clinical negligence insurance has decreased by almost a half. The reason for this is because the cost is now based on the number of successful claims made, staffing ratios and number of births.
“This is a reflection of the hard work of our maternity teams who have a continuous focus on delivering safe and high quality care.”
Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said: “The NHS remains one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, but on rare occasions care falls below acceptable standards and unsafe care should never be tolerated.
“This report shows most women have good outcomes and positive experiences of maternity care.”
This article is courtesy from The Star.
The statistics were highlighted in an official report by the National Audit Office, which said that on average nearly £700 is spent on clinical negligence insurance cover for every live birth in England.
Last year there were 12 claims made against the trust linked to botched maternity care.
In 2012/13, claims over obstetrics treatment at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust - which runs the city’s Jessop Wing maternity hospital - cost £5.2m, while £3.3m was paid in compensation and legal expenses through a scheme dealing with claims dating from before 1995.
But Chris Morley, deputy chief nurse at the trust, said the cost of its clinical negligence cover had fallen by nearly half over the past year.
Nationwide, obstetrics-related claims have risen by 80 per cent in the past five years, the audit report said. The cost of cover last year was £482m, and the average payment per claim was £277,000.
The health service in England paid out more than £3bn in compensation claims linked to maternity care between 2000 and 2010, according to the NHS Litigation Authority, which published the Sheffield figures.
Mr Morley said: “Over the last 12 months the cost of our clinical negligence insurance has decreased by almost a half. The reason for this is because the cost is now based on the number of successful claims made, staffing ratios and number of births.
“This is a reflection of the hard work of our maternity teams who have a continuous focus on delivering safe and high quality care.”
Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said: “The NHS remains one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, but on rare occasions care falls below acceptable standards and unsafe care should never be tolerated.
“This report shows most women have good outcomes and positive experiences of maternity care.”
This article is courtesy from The Star.
Saturday, 9 November 2013
Bungling doctors told Emily and Chelsea to abort their 'lifeless' babies. Thank God they refused
Sitting in a hospital waiting room, Emily Wheatley picked up her mobile phone and made a call she will remember vividly for the rest of her life.
‘Normally having your first scan is a really exciting, happy day for a new mum,’ the 32-year-old says, struggling to control her emotions. ‘But for me it was one of the worst.’
Minutes earlier the mother-to-be had been told she had miscarried and the baby she had longed for was dead in her womb at just ten weeks.
‘When they told me they couldn’t detect a heartbeat for the baby and that he or she was dead, I couldn’t take it in and burst into tears,’ recalls Emily.
‘A midwife told me I could either go home and wait for two weeks for the foetus to come out naturally or that I could take medication to speed it up there and then.
‘My sister was with me and she comforted me as best she could, but I was in a state of shock. I didn’t know what to do. All I wanted was my mother. As soon as I’d composed myself sufficiently I called her.’
And, today, a year and a half on, the gurgling tot bouncing up and down on her lap is a joyful reminder of the consequences of that split-second decision — and her mother’s response.
‘Call it “mother’s instinct” if you like but Mum knew me and knew in her heart that my baby was still alive,’ continues Emily. ‘She said I had to get a second opinion immediately and I was not to take the medication under any circumstances.’
So the following day Emily did as instructed and, at a different NHS hospital, she underwent another scan.
Within minutes a consultant was informing her that the first hospital had made a mistake and that she was, indeed, still pregnant.
It was amazing news for Emily, who because of a medical condition had feared she might struggle to have children. But the impact of what had gone before could not be so easily forgotten.
Even a photograph of the scan failed to reassure her that everything was all right and a shadow was cast over her entire pregnancy.
Indeed, she says it is only recently that she has started enjoying being a mum to Ella who is now eight months old.
‘I just didn’t dare believe that my baby was alive in case they were wrong and I felt that way throughout my pregnancy, which led to me feeling guilty, because I knew it should have been a happy time and I should have been a joyous mum-to-be,’ she says.
It would be nice to be able to dismiss what happened to Emily, who lives in Monmouth, South Wales, as a one-off. But that is not the case.
For while her treatment at the first hospital undoubtedly fell well short of what it should have been, her near-miss story is not as rare as might be imagined. And mothers like her — whose babies are saved — are the lucky ones.
What is unknown is how many take medics’ advice on medication or undergo surgical procedures, to terminate what is, in fact, a viable pregnancy.
Research two years ago found that wrongly interpreted ultrasound scans could lead to 400 healthy pregnancies being misdiagnosed as miscarriages each year in Britain.
This is more than the estimated 300 cot deaths that occur in this country annually. And it is something that haunts Emily.
‘I just thank God I spoke to my mum when they were trying to shove pills down me to get what they said was a dead baby out,’ she says.
‘If I hadn’t, Ella wouldn’t be here now. How many mothers are there out there who have maybe aborted perfectly healthy babies because of the wrong advice?’
According to government statistics, approximately 20 per cent of pregnancies miscarry. This equates to roughly 168,000 miscarriages per year, with 143,000 of these occurring in the first 12 weeks.
Of the women affected, some 45,000 require a stay in an NHS hospital.
Guidelines issued by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence lay down procedures for diagnosing miscarriages when using ultrasound.
‘Normally having your first scan is a really exciting, happy day for a new mum,’ the 32-year-old says, struggling to control her emotions. ‘But for me it was one of the worst.’
Minutes earlier the mother-to-be had been told she had miscarried and the baby she had longed for was dead in her womb at just ten weeks.
‘When they told me they couldn’t detect a heartbeat for the baby and that he or she was dead, I couldn’t take it in and burst into tears,’ recalls Emily.
‘A midwife told me I could either go home and wait for two weeks for the foetus to come out naturally or that I could take medication to speed it up there and then.
‘My sister was with me and she comforted me as best she could, but I was in a state of shock. I didn’t know what to do. All I wanted was my mother. As soon as I’d composed myself sufficiently I called her.’
And, today, a year and a half on, the gurgling tot bouncing up and down on her lap is a joyful reminder of the consequences of that split-second decision — and her mother’s response.
‘Call it “mother’s instinct” if you like but Mum knew me and knew in her heart that my baby was still alive,’ continues Emily. ‘She said I had to get a second opinion immediately and I was not to take the medication under any circumstances.’
So the following day Emily did as instructed and, at a different NHS hospital, she underwent another scan.
Within minutes a consultant was informing her that the first hospital had made a mistake and that she was, indeed, still pregnant.
It was amazing news for Emily, who because of a medical condition had feared she might struggle to have children. But the impact of what had gone before could not be so easily forgotten.
Even a photograph of the scan failed to reassure her that everything was all right and a shadow was cast over her entire pregnancy.
Indeed, she says it is only recently that she has started enjoying being a mum to Ella who is now eight months old.
‘I just didn’t dare believe that my baby was alive in case they were wrong and I felt that way throughout my pregnancy, which led to me feeling guilty, because I knew it should have been a happy time and I should have been a joyous mum-to-be,’ she says.
It would be nice to be able to dismiss what happened to Emily, who lives in Monmouth, South Wales, as a one-off. But that is not the case.
For while her treatment at the first hospital undoubtedly fell well short of what it should have been, her near-miss story is not as rare as might be imagined. And mothers like her — whose babies are saved — are the lucky ones.
What is unknown is how many take medics’ advice on medication or undergo surgical procedures, to terminate what is, in fact, a viable pregnancy.
Research two years ago found that wrongly interpreted ultrasound scans could lead to 400 healthy pregnancies being misdiagnosed as miscarriages each year in Britain.
This is more than the estimated 300 cot deaths that occur in this country annually. And it is something that haunts Emily.
‘I just thank God I spoke to my mum when they were trying to shove pills down me to get what they said was a dead baby out,’ she says.
‘If I hadn’t, Ella wouldn’t be here now. How many mothers are there out there who have maybe aborted perfectly healthy babies because of the wrong advice?’
According to government statistics, approximately 20 per cent of pregnancies miscarry. This equates to roughly 168,000 miscarriages per year, with 143,000 of these occurring in the first 12 weeks.
Of the women affected, some 45,000 require a stay in an NHS hospital.
Guidelines issued by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence lay down procedures for diagnosing miscarriages when using ultrasound.
Specifically, it is recommended that women are given a trans-vaginal (TV) — or internal — scan: the type most effective at picking up signs of a viable pregnancy, such as a heartbeat.
Only where a woman does not want such a scan should a trans-abdominal (TA) scan (which is carried out over the stomach) be used. In these cases, the patient should be advised of the potential risk of misdiagnosis.
Why the elimination of any doubt is so critical is highlighted by the experience of women such as Emily.
It was on July 18 last year that Emily, a sales executive with an insurance company, attended the maternity unit of the University Hospital of Wales (UHW) in Cardiff for what should have been a routine scan to date her pregnancy.
Having previously undergone surgery for polycystic ovary syndrome, which affects the workings of the ovaries, Emily’s first pregnancy was all the more precious.
As typically happens with a dating scan, an external TA scan was carried out, in this case by a midwife sonographer.
During the scan, the medic compared the size of the gestation sac — the ‘water bag’ containing the growing baby and the amniotic fluid that nourishes it — with the size of the foetus itself.
The latter, she claimed, was smaller than it should have been, leading her to conclude that the foetus was dead.
Another abdominal scan, using a more powerful form of ultrasound, was then carried out, which also failed to detect a heartbeat.
Both scans were then repeated by a second midwife who obtained the same results. They concluded that the baby was dead and that Emily had suffered a miscarriage. At no point was she offered an internal ultrasound.
That only occurred the following morning at Nevill Hall Hospital in Abergavenny where Emily — having spoken to her mother and delayed taking medication to evacuate the baby from her womb — was referred by her GP.
‘A consultant gynaecologist carried out the test and after she had done it she asked me to wait and she fetched another doctor to look at the monitor,’ recalls Emily. ‘The consultant then told me: “I don’t know how to say this but you have got a very healthy baby in there.”
‘I was in pieces then, just all over the place, not knowing what to believe.
‘They showed me the recording of the baby moving but I still couldn’t accept it was true.
‘My mother tried to reassure me too but nothing was sinking in.’
Back at home, Emily, who split from Ella’s father shortly after discovering she was pregnant, struggled to cope with these mixed emotions. A month later she formally complained to the hospital about her treatment.
A response from its Nurse Director followed, which claimed that while ‘normal practice was followed on the day of the scan, I am not able to provide you with any answer as to why the foetal heartbeat was not visible’.
Emily then complained to Peter Tyndall, the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. The shocking details of his investigation were published last week.
He found that since as long ago as 2006 staff at the University Hospital of Wales had been following outdated guidelines regarding scanning procedures. As a result, it is feared that hundreds of pregnant women using the hospital may have had healthy babies aborted.
The UHW delivers about 6,000 babies a year, with between 600 and 1,200 women suffering a miscarriage.
Mr Tyndall warned that Emily was unlikely to have been a one-off, adding: ‘There will have been others.’
He demanded a review of staff skills and ordered the hospital to pay Emily £1,500 in compensation.
As well as apologising to Emily, the hospital set up a helpline which has received 80 inquiries from women concerned about their treatment.
A number of the callers, it has emerged, were treated at other hospitals, prompting concern that the problem may be more widespread than first thought.
This chimes with the experience of 34-year-old Chelsea Muff.
The divorced mother-of-three from Bradford, West Yorkshire, gave birth to her youngest child Laila, 18 months ago. But, like Emily, her pregnancy was blighted by the failings of her local hospital.
Having suffered slight bleeding at seven weeks she attended the Early Pregnancy Unit at the Bradford Royal Infirmary in June 2011.
‘I went on my own because I was pretty sure that there was nothing wrong,’ says Chelsea, who works for a jewellery company.
‘The sonographer carried out a normal ultrasound scan on my stomach and then announced that there was nothing there, and that I’d had a miscarriage.
‘She left me for a bit by myself and then came back and said I had three options. I could be booked in for vacuum suction to remove the baby, I could take some tablets there and then that would make the baby pass through me or I could wait for the baby to come away naturally, which would take up to about a week.
‘I was distraught — I didn’t want to accept what I was being told and just got up and left. They told me that passing the baby could take a week or so and to call them if nothing had happened.’
They were, she recalls, terrible days. ‘I couldn’t work, I was crying in front of my children and all the time I thought I was carrying my dead baby,’ she says.
‘I was dreading what was going to happen. But at the same time, it didn’t feel right. I had two children already and I felt pregnant.’
When after ten days still nothing had happened, she was contacted by the hospital and told to come in for a vacuum suction. She ignored the call, only returning three days later to demand another scan.
This time she again underwent an abdominal scan — but with a very different outcome.
‘The consultant came in and said “Congratulations, everything’s fine with the baby”,’ recalls Chelsea.
But, as with Emily’s story, that was not the end of the emotional rollercoaster.
‘The rest of my pregnancy was awful because I was always scared something was going to happen, especially towards the end. If she ever stopped moving I thought I’d lost her again,’ she said. Chelsea complained to the hospital which admitted that the correct protocol had not been followed.
It has since reviewed its working practices and has paid for Chelsea to undergo counselling.
She explains: ‘From what I could make out I should have been given an internal scan and the baby would have shown up then. You go to hospitals and you expect them to know best, don’t you?’
Several other women who have also been misdiagnosed as suffering from miscarriages have told the Mail how their concerns were brushed aside by staff.
One, a 25-year-old from Edinburgh, was told not to worry ‘because you’ve already got one child’. Another, a 27-year-old from Essex, was offered anti-depressants — then told she could only take them if she accepted her baby was dead.
A spokesman for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said that strict guidelines relating to the use of internal scans were issued several years ago and that it was up to individual hospitals to implement them.
Meanwhile, Ruth Bender Atik — national director of the Miscarriage Association — warned that what had happened in Wales had caused distress for women across the country who would also now be concerned that they might have been misdiagnosed.
‘It is very, very distressing particularly if you have already been through medical or surgical management then wonder if this has happened to you,’ she said.
‘Unfortunately and unhappily, it has caused distress for people who have no way of finding out.
‘I hope, for women going forward, that they can take comfort from knowing that there really are good guidelines out there and that most hospitals are sticking to them.
‘Nobody wants to misdiagnose miscarriage or cause the end of a viable pregnancy.’
A fact that Emily and Chelsea —and their babies — need no reminding of.
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Only where a woman does not want such a scan should a trans-abdominal (TA) scan (which is carried out over the stomach) be used. In these cases, the patient should be advised of the potential risk of misdiagnosis.
Why the elimination of any doubt is so critical is highlighted by the experience of women such as Emily.
It was on July 18 last year that Emily, a sales executive with an insurance company, attended the maternity unit of the University Hospital of Wales (UHW) in Cardiff for what should have been a routine scan to date her pregnancy.
Having previously undergone surgery for polycystic ovary syndrome, which affects the workings of the ovaries, Emily’s first pregnancy was all the more precious.
As typically happens with a dating scan, an external TA scan was carried out, in this case by a midwife sonographer.
During the scan, the medic compared the size of the gestation sac — the ‘water bag’ containing the growing baby and the amniotic fluid that nourishes it — with the size of the foetus itself.
The latter, she claimed, was smaller than it should have been, leading her to conclude that the foetus was dead.
Another abdominal scan, using a more powerful form of ultrasound, was then carried out, which also failed to detect a heartbeat.
Both scans were then repeated by a second midwife who obtained the same results. They concluded that the baby was dead and that Emily had suffered a miscarriage. At no point was she offered an internal ultrasound.
That only occurred the following morning at Nevill Hall Hospital in Abergavenny where Emily — having spoken to her mother and delayed taking medication to evacuate the baby from her womb — was referred by her GP.
‘A consultant gynaecologist carried out the test and after she had done it she asked me to wait and she fetched another doctor to look at the monitor,’ recalls Emily. ‘The consultant then told me: “I don’t know how to say this but you have got a very healthy baby in there.”
‘I was in pieces then, just all over the place, not knowing what to believe.
‘They showed me the recording of the baby moving but I still couldn’t accept it was true.
‘My mother tried to reassure me too but nothing was sinking in.’
Back at home, Emily, who split from Ella’s father shortly after discovering she was pregnant, struggled to cope with these mixed emotions. A month later she formally complained to the hospital about her treatment.
A response from its Nurse Director followed, which claimed that while ‘normal practice was followed on the day of the scan, I am not able to provide you with any answer as to why the foetal heartbeat was not visible’.
Emily then complained to Peter Tyndall, the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. The shocking details of his investigation were published last week.
He found that since as long ago as 2006 staff at the University Hospital of Wales had been following outdated guidelines regarding scanning procedures. As a result, it is feared that hundreds of pregnant women using the hospital may have had healthy babies aborted.
The UHW delivers about 6,000 babies a year, with between 600 and 1,200 women suffering a miscarriage.
Mr Tyndall warned that Emily was unlikely to have been a one-off, adding: ‘There will have been others.’
He demanded a review of staff skills and ordered the hospital to pay Emily £1,500 in compensation.
As well as apologising to Emily, the hospital set up a helpline which has received 80 inquiries from women concerned about their treatment.
A number of the callers, it has emerged, were treated at other hospitals, prompting concern that the problem may be more widespread than first thought.
This chimes with the experience of 34-year-old Chelsea Muff.
The divorced mother-of-three from Bradford, West Yorkshire, gave birth to her youngest child Laila, 18 months ago. But, like Emily, her pregnancy was blighted by the failings of her local hospital.
Having suffered slight bleeding at seven weeks she attended the Early Pregnancy Unit at the Bradford Royal Infirmary in June 2011.
‘I went on my own because I was pretty sure that there was nothing wrong,’ says Chelsea, who works for a jewellery company.
‘The sonographer carried out a normal ultrasound scan on my stomach and then announced that there was nothing there, and that I’d had a miscarriage.
‘She left me for a bit by myself and then came back and said I had three options. I could be booked in for vacuum suction to remove the baby, I could take some tablets there and then that would make the baby pass through me or I could wait for the baby to come away naturally, which would take up to about a week.
‘I was distraught — I didn’t want to accept what I was being told and just got up and left. They told me that passing the baby could take a week or so and to call them if nothing had happened.’
They were, she recalls, terrible days. ‘I couldn’t work, I was crying in front of my children and all the time I thought I was carrying my dead baby,’ she says.
‘I was dreading what was going to happen. But at the same time, it didn’t feel right. I had two children already and I felt pregnant.’
When after ten days still nothing had happened, she was contacted by the hospital and told to come in for a vacuum suction. She ignored the call, only returning three days later to demand another scan.
This time she again underwent an abdominal scan — but with a very different outcome.
‘The consultant came in and said “Congratulations, everything’s fine with the baby”,’ recalls Chelsea.
But, as with Emily’s story, that was not the end of the emotional rollercoaster.
‘The rest of my pregnancy was awful because I was always scared something was going to happen, especially towards the end. If she ever stopped moving I thought I’d lost her again,’ she said. Chelsea complained to the hospital which admitted that the correct protocol had not been followed.
It has since reviewed its working practices and has paid for Chelsea to undergo counselling.
She explains: ‘From what I could make out I should have been given an internal scan and the baby would have shown up then. You go to hospitals and you expect them to know best, don’t you?’
Several other women who have also been misdiagnosed as suffering from miscarriages have told the Mail how their concerns were brushed aside by staff.
One, a 25-year-old from Edinburgh, was told not to worry ‘because you’ve already got one child’. Another, a 27-year-old from Essex, was offered anti-depressants — then told she could only take them if she accepted her baby was dead.
A spokesman for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said that strict guidelines relating to the use of internal scans were issued several years ago and that it was up to individual hospitals to implement them.
Meanwhile, Ruth Bender Atik — national director of the Miscarriage Association — warned that what had happened in Wales had caused distress for women across the country who would also now be concerned that they might have been misdiagnosed.
‘It is very, very distressing particularly if you have already been through medical or surgical management then wonder if this has happened to you,’ she said.
‘Unfortunately and unhappily, it has caused distress for people who have no way of finding out.
‘I hope, for women going forward, that they can take comfort from knowing that there really are good guidelines out there and that most hospitals are sticking to them.
‘Nobody wants to misdiagnose miscarriage or cause the end of a viable pregnancy.’
A fact that Emily and Chelsea —and their babies — need no reminding of.
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Friday, 8 November 2013
Hospital Trust ‘could face compensation claims amounting to millions of pounds’
Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust could potentially face compensation claims amounting to millions of pounds in the wake of the cancer patient data scandal, legal experts have warned.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) issued a report earlier this week stating that staff at Colchester General Hospital had tampered with patient records to improve the hospital’s statistics for cancer treatment waiting times.
In response, the Trust said it had notified the NHS Litigation Authority, the body that deals with claims on behalf of NHS Trusts, to manage any potential claims.
While stressing they can only speculate on the level of any claims for medical negligence at this stage, solicitors say there is the potential for them to total into the millions of pounds.
Naomi Eady, who is a clinical negligence solicitor at Colchester-based law firm Thompson, Smith and Puxon, said falsifying patient records is not in itself negligent medical care, but given that the CQC reported that figures were being altered to cover up poor performance, there is a suggestion that treatment within the cancer department was not being given to an appropriate standard.
She said: “If it can be established that a patient’s cancer treatment was unreasonably delayed and this delay caused extra pain and suffering then the Trust may be liable to compensate the patient.
“Similarly, if the unreasonably delayed treatment has caused death then the deceased’s family can make a claim based on the dependency on their lost loved one for financial support as well as care and services.
“Given that the amount of compensation is based on the level and extent of the pain, suffering and loss sustained, then the amount of damages that can be awarded will vary hugely from case to case. Compensation for the preventable death of a high-earner with dependents, such as a spouse or young children, can be very substantial. We have had a case of this nature that achieved a million pounds in compensation. Similarly, there are cases where the damages that can be claimed have little or no value whatsoever. Compensation in delayed cancer diagnosis and treatment cases can range from zero to millions of pounds, it depends entirely upon the circumstances of each individual’s case.”
Peter Savage, a partner at the specialist clinical negligence law firm the Medical Accident Group, said: “The CQC report showed that out of the 61 cases looked at, 22 patients – more than a third - had not been treated within agreed time guidelines.
“If you consider that the hospital deals with 6,000 cancer patients each year there’s a huge potential for more cases of delayed treatment to come to light. And the potential for a huge number of negligence claims to follow.”
Iona Meeres Young is a senior associate specialising in clinical negligence at law firm Slater and Gordon, which is currently representing the family of four-year old Mackenzie Cackett who died at Colchester General Hospital in May last year.
Ms Meeres-Young added: “There could be thousands of potential victims as we do not know how far back this poor standard of care dates. These patients have a right to know whether they were treated appropriately and whether their prognosis has been compromised by any failings in their care.
“Trying to estimate the value of potential negligence claims at this point is very speculative but if the victim is a main breadwinner in his mid-30s or 40s with a young family for example, and it can be shown that a delay in treatment led to a death rather than a cure, then such a claim could be worth in excess of half a million pounds.”
A spokesman for Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust said: “If any patient has suffered harm as a result of delays, our primary concern will be to make sure that individual is given the right care immediately.
“We have notified our insurers, the NHS Litigation Authority, who would assist with the management of any potential claims.”
This article is courtesy from EADT.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) issued a report earlier this week stating that staff at Colchester General Hospital had tampered with patient records to improve the hospital’s statistics for cancer treatment waiting times.
In response, the Trust said it had notified the NHS Litigation Authority, the body that deals with claims on behalf of NHS Trusts, to manage any potential claims.
While stressing they can only speculate on the level of any claims for medical negligence at this stage, solicitors say there is the potential for them to total into the millions of pounds.
Naomi Eady, who is a clinical negligence solicitor at Colchester-based law firm Thompson, Smith and Puxon, said falsifying patient records is not in itself negligent medical care, but given that the CQC reported that figures were being altered to cover up poor performance, there is a suggestion that treatment within the cancer department was not being given to an appropriate standard.
She said: “If it can be established that a patient’s cancer treatment was unreasonably delayed and this delay caused extra pain and suffering then the Trust may be liable to compensate the patient.
“Similarly, if the unreasonably delayed treatment has caused death then the deceased’s family can make a claim based on the dependency on their lost loved one for financial support as well as care and services.
“Given that the amount of compensation is based on the level and extent of the pain, suffering and loss sustained, then the amount of damages that can be awarded will vary hugely from case to case. Compensation for the preventable death of a high-earner with dependents, such as a spouse or young children, can be very substantial. We have had a case of this nature that achieved a million pounds in compensation. Similarly, there are cases where the damages that can be claimed have little or no value whatsoever. Compensation in delayed cancer diagnosis and treatment cases can range from zero to millions of pounds, it depends entirely upon the circumstances of each individual’s case.”
Peter Savage, a partner at the specialist clinical negligence law firm the Medical Accident Group, said: “The CQC report showed that out of the 61 cases looked at, 22 patients – more than a third - had not been treated within agreed time guidelines.
“If you consider that the hospital deals with 6,000 cancer patients each year there’s a huge potential for more cases of delayed treatment to come to light. And the potential for a huge number of negligence claims to follow.”
Iona Meeres Young is a senior associate specialising in clinical negligence at law firm Slater and Gordon, which is currently representing the family of four-year old Mackenzie Cackett who died at Colchester General Hospital in May last year.
Ms Meeres-Young added: “There could be thousands of potential victims as we do not know how far back this poor standard of care dates. These patients have a right to know whether they were treated appropriately and whether their prognosis has been compromised by any failings in their care.
“Trying to estimate the value of potential negligence claims at this point is very speculative but if the victim is a main breadwinner in his mid-30s or 40s with a young family for example, and it can be shown that a delay in treatment led to a death rather than a cure, then such a claim could be worth in excess of half a million pounds.”
A spokesman for Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust said: “If any patient has suffered harm as a result of delays, our primary concern will be to make sure that individual is given the right care immediately.
“We have notified our insurers, the NHS Litigation Authority, who would assist with the management of any potential claims.”
This article is courtesy from EADT.
Wednesday, 6 November 2013
We don't need more hospital beds – we need better patient management
"I am calling to say that my 86 year old mother has been waiting for nine hours on a trolley. This is unacceptable! How can it happen in a first-world country?"
"Peter, we have been trying all morning to get the hospitals on the phone so we can get some answers. It’s not good enough, is it?"
Yet again, there is a city-wide shortage of public hospital beds in Melbourne. Patients are getting tired, relatives cranky, creating the urgent question that reverberates throughout the corridors as doctors like me turn up to work: "can anyone be discharged?". Of course, this urgency is no greater than other days but in recent days the radio waves have been rattling with complaints, and nothing worries bureaucrats more than a crisis that might creep into the evening news when opinions are formed.
I begin the ward round with my eyes scrutinising the patient list for anyone who can go home.
We see Mr Lee first. At 48, he has suffered his first seizure. Although the initial tests are reassuringly normal, he is in the age bracket where it’s prudent to exclude a brain tumour. He can either have an inpatient MRI at the end of this week, or an outpatient MRI next month. He doesn’t speak English, is the sole bread-winner of his six-member family, and is desperately anxious to rule out a serious diagnosis. He stays because it feels inhuman to do any less.
Next to him is Mrs Blake, 90, with early dementia. She left the stove on until the meat burnt to a char and her fingers just escaped. Her grateful husband eagerly consented to the couple being placed in the same nursing home. "It’s not what I had imagined but at least we will be together and she will be safe." But finding a nursing home with two available beds – one in a dementia-specific wing – is an uphill task even with the cooperation of their diligent son and our knowledgeable officer. So she stays too, her risk of incurring a serious setback like a fall or pneumonia increasing with every additional day on the ward.
Two young patients are discharged quickly and we all breathe a sigh of relief. "Have we fulfilled our duty?" a junior doctor asks, both strain and sarcasm evident in his voice. Before I can answer, we are accosted by an irate relative.
"I am telling you now that I am not taking my mum home until you have fixed her."
Her mum is 80 and suffers from osteoarthritis. We have managed her pain, provided physiotherapy, and seen her walking incremental distances safely. She has been cleared by multiple health professionals but her daughter is adamant that we are missing something.
"We can’t reverse osteoarthritis, just manage the symptoms and she is better", I explain gently.
"I am not taking her home until she has seen an orthopaedic surgeon." Getting a surgeon will take time and won't be helpful, but I also know that the daughter has figured out how to play the game. Management by threat works very well in the short term. Meanwhile, the social worker has discovered that the real issue is that the daughter doesn’t want her mother living with her anymore, but doesn’t want to tell her. Family dysfunction is the reason behind this patient’s failure to be discharged. She could be here for weeks.
People looking in from the outside constantly wonder why there is a perennial lack of hospital beds. The images of elderly patients stuck in trolleys have fast become the sine qua non of a healthcare system said to be in crisis. These discomfiting sights reflexively make us demand more hospital beds. But as any modern clinician will tell you, the lack of hospital beds is merely a symptom of a much bigger problem.
Medical wards such as mine are the dominant factor dictating bed availability in hospitals. These wards admit the bulk of elderly patients who typically present with multiple complex and chronic conditions. Their illness itself can sometimes be the easiest part to manage out of the many obstacles they present.
We are fortunate to have access to the most sophisticated investigations, but their increasing demand creates a waitlist. An inpatient test can happen in days, while the same test can take weeks or months as an outpatient. A specialist review is easier to obtain in hospital, especially if you fear that a weak, vulnerable or poor patient may never make it to their outpatient appointment. Having set up the expectation of an intervention, every patient wants it now.
Increasingly, there are never enough beds for respite, rehabilitation or palliative care – patients can experience long delays to be transferred from an acute hospital bed to these places. Council services are usually operating at capacity and seldom accept patients at very short notice. Even a regular recipient of services must wait to have them reinstated after hospitalisation. Add to this mix a public holiday and the hospital groans under the pressure of reduced discharges. On such occasions, I often wonder if hapless healthcare professionals are the only ones who appreciate that the need for ancillary services does not suddenly diminish on a long weekend.
While working out the logistics of residential care is onerous, it can be notoriously difficult returning a resident to their own nursing home. Even when there is consensus that the patient would be best served in a familiar environment, successfully returning the patient to their nursing home in the evening or the weekend is practically impossible. This is another reason why hospital beds are full.
Given the shrill calls of a system in crisis, you could be forgiven for doubting that Australian healthcare is consistently rated at the top of the world. But doctors still contend with unhappy families who "want everything done". Such are our strides of progress that to be reminded of the limitations of medicine seems perverse, but alas, it is true. Since no doctor wants to be perceived as "giving up" on a patient, we keep them in longer, throw in some extra tests, and buy time – but more is not better and is definitely more risky.
An emphasis on improved doctor-patient communication and advance care planning is essential. It is something that we are painfully slow to recognise as a society but the best-served patients will be those who have an active say in navigating their care, especially at the end of life.
Just as giving paracetamol for a fever does not address the underlying illness, simply opening more beds ignores the systemic malady. Good healthcare means more than finding a hospital bed for elderly patients waiting all night in a trolley. It must ultimately address the bottlenecks that prevent them from making room for the next needy patient.
This article is courtesy from The Guardian.
"Peter, we have been trying all morning to get the hospitals on the phone so we can get some answers. It’s not good enough, is it?"
Yet again, there is a city-wide shortage of public hospital beds in Melbourne. Patients are getting tired, relatives cranky, creating the urgent question that reverberates throughout the corridors as doctors like me turn up to work: "can anyone be discharged?". Of course, this urgency is no greater than other days but in recent days the radio waves have been rattling with complaints, and nothing worries bureaucrats more than a crisis that might creep into the evening news when opinions are formed.
I begin the ward round with my eyes scrutinising the patient list for anyone who can go home.
We see Mr Lee first. At 48, he has suffered his first seizure. Although the initial tests are reassuringly normal, he is in the age bracket where it’s prudent to exclude a brain tumour. He can either have an inpatient MRI at the end of this week, or an outpatient MRI next month. He doesn’t speak English, is the sole bread-winner of his six-member family, and is desperately anxious to rule out a serious diagnosis. He stays because it feels inhuman to do any less.
Next to him is Mrs Blake, 90, with early dementia. She left the stove on until the meat burnt to a char and her fingers just escaped. Her grateful husband eagerly consented to the couple being placed in the same nursing home. "It’s not what I had imagined but at least we will be together and she will be safe." But finding a nursing home with two available beds – one in a dementia-specific wing – is an uphill task even with the cooperation of their diligent son and our knowledgeable officer. So she stays too, her risk of incurring a serious setback like a fall or pneumonia increasing with every additional day on the ward.
Two young patients are discharged quickly and we all breathe a sigh of relief. "Have we fulfilled our duty?" a junior doctor asks, both strain and sarcasm evident in his voice. Before I can answer, we are accosted by an irate relative.
"I am telling you now that I am not taking my mum home until you have fixed her."
Her mum is 80 and suffers from osteoarthritis. We have managed her pain, provided physiotherapy, and seen her walking incremental distances safely. She has been cleared by multiple health professionals but her daughter is adamant that we are missing something.
"We can’t reverse osteoarthritis, just manage the symptoms and she is better", I explain gently.
"I am not taking her home until she has seen an orthopaedic surgeon." Getting a surgeon will take time and won't be helpful, but I also know that the daughter has figured out how to play the game. Management by threat works very well in the short term. Meanwhile, the social worker has discovered that the real issue is that the daughter doesn’t want her mother living with her anymore, but doesn’t want to tell her. Family dysfunction is the reason behind this patient’s failure to be discharged. She could be here for weeks.
People looking in from the outside constantly wonder why there is a perennial lack of hospital beds. The images of elderly patients stuck in trolleys have fast become the sine qua non of a healthcare system said to be in crisis. These discomfiting sights reflexively make us demand more hospital beds. But as any modern clinician will tell you, the lack of hospital beds is merely a symptom of a much bigger problem.
Medical wards such as mine are the dominant factor dictating bed availability in hospitals. These wards admit the bulk of elderly patients who typically present with multiple complex and chronic conditions. Their illness itself can sometimes be the easiest part to manage out of the many obstacles they present.
We are fortunate to have access to the most sophisticated investigations, but their increasing demand creates a waitlist. An inpatient test can happen in days, while the same test can take weeks or months as an outpatient. A specialist review is easier to obtain in hospital, especially if you fear that a weak, vulnerable or poor patient may never make it to their outpatient appointment. Having set up the expectation of an intervention, every patient wants it now.
Increasingly, there are never enough beds for respite, rehabilitation or palliative care – patients can experience long delays to be transferred from an acute hospital bed to these places. Council services are usually operating at capacity and seldom accept patients at very short notice. Even a regular recipient of services must wait to have them reinstated after hospitalisation. Add to this mix a public holiday and the hospital groans under the pressure of reduced discharges. On such occasions, I often wonder if hapless healthcare professionals are the only ones who appreciate that the need for ancillary services does not suddenly diminish on a long weekend.
While working out the logistics of residential care is onerous, it can be notoriously difficult returning a resident to their own nursing home. Even when there is consensus that the patient would be best served in a familiar environment, successfully returning the patient to their nursing home in the evening or the weekend is practically impossible. This is another reason why hospital beds are full.
Given the shrill calls of a system in crisis, you could be forgiven for doubting that Australian healthcare is consistently rated at the top of the world. But doctors still contend with unhappy families who "want everything done". Such are our strides of progress that to be reminded of the limitations of medicine seems perverse, but alas, it is true. Since no doctor wants to be perceived as "giving up" on a patient, we keep them in longer, throw in some extra tests, and buy time – but more is not better and is definitely more risky.
An emphasis on improved doctor-patient communication and advance care planning is essential. It is something that we are painfully slow to recognise as a society but the best-served patients will be those who have an active say in navigating their care, especially at the end of life.
Just as giving paracetamol for a fever does not address the underlying illness, simply opening more beds ignores the systemic malady. Good healthcare means more than finding a hospital bed for elderly patients waiting all night in a trolley. It must ultimately address the bottlenecks that prevent them from making room for the next needy patient.
This article is courtesy from The Guardian.
Tuesday, 5 November 2013
Teenager who complained of headaches dies of brain tumour
A teenage girl died after medics failed to spot that she had a brain tumour – despite seeing her 24 times in the last year of her life.
Natasha Simmonds, 16, was treated by 13 doctors but none of them ordered a crucial MRI scan until it was too late.
Her mother, Sarah Simmonds, claims that three months before her daughter died, one A&E doctor accused her of ‘putting the symptoms on’ and refused to give her a scan because they were reserved for ‘life and death’ situations.
Natasha, who was studying for a career in childcare, complained of headaches, numbness in her limbs, back pains, vomiting and problems with her eyesight.
But the paediatrician in charge of her care dismissed the symptoms as migraines. Natasha died on January 24, eight days after the tumour was finally discovered. It had twisted around her brain and spine.
Last night, Natasha’s grieving twin, Fiona, accused the health service of ignoring her sister’s complaints. ‘She was seen by so many people and none of them took her seriously,’ she said.
An inquest heard that Natasha, from Radstock in Somerset, had been attending hospital since 2008 and her condition got much worse in 2010.
She was referred to associate specialist paediatrician Colin Downie at Bath’s Royal United Hospital in February 2012, who said she had migraines. Because Natasha seemed to improve between each episode of ill-health, he said her symptoms were not serious enough for an MRI.
In the 11 months that followed, Natasha saw four paediatric doctors, six GPs and three A&E doctors, all of whom failed to diagnose the cancer.
Dr Downie finally ordered an MRI in November, nine months after he first saw the teenager, but the scan did not take place until January and the results were delivered only eight days before Natasha died. The scan showed a rare cancer – a disseminated oligodendroglioma-like leptomeningeal tumour.
Dr Downie told the inquest he regretted not asking for the scan to be carried out urgently.
Natasha was admitted to Frenchay Hospital in Bristol and had two emergency operations on her brain and spine. She died on January 24, from lung damage caused by the cancer.
At the inquest on September 19, Avon coroner Maria Voisin recorded a narrative verdict, concluding that Natasha had died from natural causes. She said there was no need to make a formal recommendation for changes at the hospital.
But yesterday Mrs Simmonds, 47, told the Mail: ‘We’ll never know what would have happened if she’d been given an MRI scan when we first asked for one.
‘At the very least she wouldn’t have died so suddenly and so frightened.
‘We were so shocked. We’d been told for so long that it was migraines, we never thought it could have been cancer. She knew she was really sick and before her second operation she begged me to take her home so she could die. She spent the last few days of her life terrified.’
Mrs Simmonds, who works as a GP receptionist and is separated from Natasha’s father, Ken, added: ‘She was a beautiful person, unique and one of a kind. I just can’t believe she has gone.
‘I trusted in the medical profession and I feel so angry and let down. I’ve been told lessons have been learned but that doesn’t help when it’s your child that has died.’
A spokesman for the Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust said: ‘In the next few weeks many of the clinicians who looked after Natasha will be meeting to discuss this sad case and ensure that any opportunities for learning are not missed.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Natasha Simmonds, 16, was treated by 13 doctors but none of them ordered a crucial MRI scan until it was too late.
Her mother, Sarah Simmonds, claims that three months before her daughter died, one A&E doctor accused her of ‘putting the symptoms on’ and refused to give her a scan because they were reserved for ‘life and death’ situations.
Natasha, who was studying for a career in childcare, complained of headaches, numbness in her limbs, back pains, vomiting and problems with her eyesight.
But the paediatrician in charge of her care dismissed the symptoms as migraines. Natasha died on January 24, eight days after the tumour was finally discovered. It had twisted around her brain and spine.
Last night, Natasha’s grieving twin, Fiona, accused the health service of ignoring her sister’s complaints. ‘She was seen by so many people and none of them took her seriously,’ she said.
An inquest heard that Natasha, from Radstock in Somerset, had been attending hospital since 2008 and her condition got much worse in 2010.
She was referred to associate specialist paediatrician Colin Downie at Bath’s Royal United Hospital in February 2012, who said she had migraines. Because Natasha seemed to improve between each episode of ill-health, he said her symptoms were not serious enough for an MRI.
In the 11 months that followed, Natasha saw four paediatric doctors, six GPs and three A&E doctors, all of whom failed to diagnose the cancer.
Dr Downie finally ordered an MRI in November, nine months after he first saw the teenager, but the scan did not take place until January and the results were delivered only eight days before Natasha died. The scan showed a rare cancer – a disseminated oligodendroglioma-like leptomeningeal tumour.
Dr Downie told the inquest he regretted not asking for the scan to be carried out urgently.
Natasha was admitted to Frenchay Hospital in Bristol and had two emergency operations on her brain and spine. She died on January 24, from lung damage caused by the cancer.
At the inquest on September 19, Avon coroner Maria Voisin recorded a narrative verdict, concluding that Natasha had died from natural causes. She said there was no need to make a formal recommendation for changes at the hospital.
But yesterday Mrs Simmonds, 47, told the Mail: ‘We’ll never know what would have happened if she’d been given an MRI scan when we first asked for one.
‘At the very least she wouldn’t have died so suddenly and so frightened.
‘We were so shocked. We’d been told for so long that it was migraines, we never thought it could have been cancer. She knew she was really sick and before her second operation she begged me to take her home so she could die. She spent the last few days of her life terrified.’
Mrs Simmonds, who works as a GP receptionist and is separated from Natasha’s father, Ken, added: ‘She was a beautiful person, unique and one of a kind. I just can’t believe she has gone.
‘I trusted in the medical profession and I feel so angry and let down. I’ve been told lessons have been learned but that doesn’t help when it’s your child that has died.’
A spokesman for the Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust said: ‘In the next few weeks many of the clinicians who looked after Natasha will be meeting to discuss this sad case and ensure that any opportunities for learning are not missed.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Monday, 4 November 2013
Medical negligence claims and defective or failing equipment
Defects and failures are all-too-common issues in medical negligence claims. In many sectors, defects might not pose a particularly significant health and safety risk, but in healthcare they can literally be the difference between life and death.
Reporting defects and failures is therefore an essential part of patient protection and health and safety within the healthcare sector. Employers, workers and managers must be aware of the risks of failures and defects and know how to flag up these problems and remedy them when they are noticed, preventing medical negligence claims and improving patient outcomes.
What are failures and defects?
Failures and defects are:
- Incidents that occur due to inappropriate adjustments, modifications, maintenance or servicing, or through improper use, that cause equipment to become defective or to fail
- Events that could impact the safety of patients, employees or other people that arise due to defective or failing equipment
- Deficiencies in the economical or technological performance of equipment
- Failures in water, steam, electricity, communications, gas or other critical services
- Any defects identified by Local Authority or Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspectors that relate to products or their instructions
Dealing with defects and failures
Employees should feel free to report defects and failures - this is one of the best ways healthcare facilities can protect themselves from medical negligence claims. There is a Defect and Failure reporting system available, which is managed by the NGS and Social Care Information Centre. Reports can be made online at www.efm.ic.nhs.uk. Log-in names and passwords are not required. Alternatively, more information is available to concerned parties over the phone - people should dial 0845 300 6016.
Other action may be required when encountering defects and failures that could lead to medical negligence claims - employees should support the issue to their employer to ensure it is dealt with properly. Some of the additional actions that may be needed include:
- Reporting to the HSE under RIDDOR (the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations)
- Reporting under 1999's Ionising Radiation Regulations
- Reporting incidents to relevant NHS officers
- Preventing use and access to the failing or defective equipment
It is worth remembering that while healthcare bodies may wish to repair or remove the defective equipment in order to avoid medical negligence claims, this equipment may be evidence and should be treated accordingly. Therefore, this equipment should only be interfered with for explicit health and safety purposes or to prevent loss, personal injuries or additional damage.
No equipment should be removed unless the issue has been investigated and a course of action has been approved. Incident reports should be obtained, with eyewitness reports recorded, and in some cases, these reports should be signed in front of proper witnesses.
Preventing medical negligence claims and improving standards of patient care must be a key priority for all healthcare facilities. Employers must ensure their employees know what to do when encountering this equipment, as this knowledge could easily save patients' lives.
Stacey Aston
Stacey Aston has spent years looking into medical negligence compensation cases and other forms of mistreatment and poor service in the healthcare setting for a team of solicitors in Burnley, she likes playing with her pet rats.
Reporting defects and failures is therefore an essential part of patient protection and health and safety within the healthcare sector. Employers, workers and managers must be aware of the risks of failures and defects and know how to flag up these problems and remedy them when they are noticed, preventing medical negligence claims and improving patient outcomes.
What are failures and defects?
Failures and defects are:
- Incidents that occur due to inappropriate adjustments, modifications, maintenance or servicing, or through improper use, that cause equipment to become defective or to fail
- Events that could impact the safety of patients, employees or other people that arise due to defective or failing equipment
- Deficiencies in the economical or technological performance of equipment
- Failures in water, steam, electricity, communications, gas or other critical services
- Any defects identified by Local Authority or Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspectors that relate to products or their instructions
Dealing with defects and failures
Employees should feel free to report defects and failures - this is one of the best ways healthcare facilities can protect themselves from medical negligence claims. There is a Defect and Failure reporting system available, which is managed by the NGS and Social Care Information Centre. Reports can be made online at www.efm.ic.nhs.uk. Log-in names and passwords are not required. Alternatively, more information is available to concerned parties over the phone - people should dial 0845 300 6016.
Other action may be required when encountering defects and failures that could lead to medical negligence claims - employees should support the issue to their employer to ensure it is dealt with properly. Some of the additional actions that may be needed include:
- Reporting to the HSE under RIDDOR (the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations)
- Reporting under 1999's Ionising Radiation Regulations
- Reporting incidents to relevant NHS officers
- Preventing use and access to the failing or defective equipment
It is worth remembering that while healthcare bodies may wish to repair or remove the defective equipment in order to avoid medical negligence claims, this equipment may be evidence and should be treated accordingly. Therefore, this equipment should only be interfered with for explicit health and safety purposes or to prevent loss, personal injuries or additional damage.
No equipment should be removed unless the issue has been investigated and a course of action has been approved. Incident reports should be obtained, with eyewitness reports recorded, and in some cases, these reports should be signed in front of proper witnesses.
Preventing medical negligence claims and improving standards of patient care must be a key priority for all healthcare facilities. Employers must ensure their employees know what to do when encountering this equipment, as this knowledge could easily save patients' lives.
Stacey Aston
Stacey Aston has spent years looking into medical negligence compensation cases and other forms of mistreatment and poor service in the healthcare setting for a team of solicitors in Burnley, she likes playing with her pet rats.
Sunday, 3 November 2013
Royal Bolton Hospital could be fined £1.4 million for failing superbug targets
The Royal Bolton could face up to £1.4 million in penalties for failing superbug targets.
The Bolton NHS Foundation Trust — which runs the Royal Bolton Hospital — has already reported 23 cases of superbug Clostridium Diffcile since April.
Between April, this year, and April, 2014, it has an annual target of just 28.
Once the trust hits this, it will be fined £50,000 for every case over the target by the Bolton Clinical Commissioning Group — the organisation which allocates funding for the its services.
This means if the number increases at the same rate for the rest of the year — an average 4.6 cases a month — there will be about 55 cases for the year and the trust will be fined £1.4 million.
Hospital bosses have now launched a £290,000 battle plan to tackle superbugs.
Director of Nursing, Trish Armstrong-Child, was appointed permanently by Bolton NHS Foundation Trust in August and is on a mission to drive down the number of C Difficile cases in the hospital and community.
Simon Worthington, Director of Finance, admitted it was unlikely the trust would achieve this year’s target.
He said: “We have a comprehensive plan to reduce the number of cases of C.Difficile in the best interests of patients and this is now showing results.
“However due to the high number of cases previously, it is unlikely we will achieve this year’s target and may incur financial penalties, which is obviously a concern. However we do have risk management arrangements with the CCG and it is possible in certain circumstances that the total penalty may not be imposed.”
All CCG’s across the UK can impose financial penalties if foundation trust breach certain targets as part of a national contract.
“We have a zero tolerance to hospital acquired infections, and ideally want no patient to get an infection while in the care of the NHS. The target is 28 for Bolton Foundation Trust, and if they breach this target, as per the national contract, these penalties can be applied. We always have joint discussions with the trust to understand the application of any penalties and their impact.”Su Long, chief officer of Bolton CCG, said: “These targets are set nationally by NHS England and one of these targets is the rates of Clostridium difficile or C Diff.
The CCG says it is “impressed” with action being taken to combat superbugs at the hospital and expects the trust to meet its targets next year.
Yet some say the financial penalties are a backward step for hospital finances.
Cllr Andy Morgan, who sits on the health scrutiny committee, said: “We are supposed to all be in this together and imposing fines for breaching a target we already knew we would fail.
“If the CCG is going to impose this fine, I would hope it gives the trust some extra funds to specifically target the C Difficile.
“It’s a ludicrous idea to impose fines like that.”
How the hospital will tackle superbugs THE C-Difficile action plan will concentrate on improving all wards on the A to D block at the Royal Bolton Hospital by January 2014.
So far, the hospital has replaced 107 mattresses, 37 commodes and installed new hand basins and floor laminates at four ward entrances, with another nine to go.
The £290,000 investment has also bought ‘fogging’ machines, which use Hydrogen Peroxide Vapour to decontaminate wards.
Bosses have have also installed sliding doors on older wards.
Ms Armstrong-Child said: “What I am really keen to do is to raise the awareness of infection control in the hospital and bring that message home that it is everybody’s business. It’s not about hierarchy and not just the staff’s responsibility — it’s patients and visitors too.
“We’ve increased the amount of reminders at the entrances to the hospital and wards to reinforce that message because it has to be a constant from everybody. This is not just a 12-month turnaround plan, this is about sustainable practices that will bring down the number of C-Difficile cases.”
The director of nursing has also commissioned an independent review of cleaning practices in the trust.
She added: “Good care is all about the basics and Bolton has had some challenges over the past year.
“The target is a real challenge there’s no doubt about it.”
How Royal Bolton will make improvements
THE C-Difficile action plan will concentrate on improving all wards on the A to D block at the Royal Bolton Hospital by January, 2014.
So far, the hospital has replaced 107 mattresses, 37 commodes and installed new hand basins and floor laminates at four ward entrances, with another nine to go.
The £290,000 investment has also bought ‘fogging’ machines, which use Hydrogen Peroxide Vapour to decontaminate wards.
Bosses have have also installed sliding doors on older wards. Ms Armstrong-Child said: “What I am really keen to do is to raise the awareness of infection control in the hospital and bring the message home that it is everybody’s business.
It’s not about hierarchy and not just the staff’s responsibility — it’s patients and visitors too.
“We’ve increased the amount of reminders at the entrances to the hospital and wards to reinforce that message because it has to be a constant from everybody.
This is not just a 12-month turnaround plan, this is about sustainable practices that will bring down the number of C-Difficile cases.”
The director of nursing has also commissioned an independent review of cleaning practices in the trust.
She added: “Good care is all about the basics and Bolton has had some challenges over the past year.
“The target is a real challenge there’s no doubt about it.”
The Bolton NHS Foundation Trust — which runs the Royal Bolton Hospital — has already reported 23 cases of superbug Clostridium Diffcile since April.
Between April, this year, and April, 2014, it has an annual target of just 28.
Once the trust hits this, it will be fined £50,000 for every case over the target by the Bolton Clinical Commissioning Group — the organisation which allocates funding for the its services.
This means if the number increases at the same rate for the rest of the year — an average 4.6 cases a month — there will be about 55 cases for the year and the trust will be fined £1.4 million.
Hospital bosses have now launched a £290,000 battle plan to tackle superbugs.
Director of Nursing, Trish Armstrong-Child, was appointed permanently by Bolton NHS Foundation Trust in August and is on a mission to drive down the number of C Difficile cases in the hospital and community.
Simon Worthington, Director of Finance, admitted it was unlikely the trust would achieve this year’s target.
He said: “We have a comprehensive plan to reduce the number of cases of C.Difficile in the best interests of patients and this is now showing results.
“However due to the high number of cases previously, it is unlikely we will achieve this year’s target and may incur financial penalties, which is obviously a concern. However we do have risk management arrangements with the CCG and it is possible in certain circumstances that the total penalty may not be imposed.”
All CCG’s across the UK can impose financial penalties if foundation trust breach certain targets as part of a national contract.
“We have a zero tolerance to hospital acquired infections, and ideally want no patient to get an infection while in the care of the NHS. The target is 28 for Bolton Foundation Trust, and if they breach this target, as per the national contract, these penalties can be applied. We always have joint discussions with the trust to understand the application of any penalties and their impact.”Su Long, chief officer of Bolton CCG, said: “These targets are set nationally by NHS England and one of these targets is the rates of Clostridium difficile or C Diff.
The CCG says it is “impressed” with action being taken to combat superbugs at the hospital and expects the trust to meet its targets next year.
Yet some say the financial penalties are a backward step for hospital finances.
Cllr Andy Morgan, who sits on the health scrutiny committee, said: “We are supposed to all be in this together and imposing fines for breaching a target we already knew we would fail.
“If the CCG is going to impose this fine, I would hope it gives the trust some extra funds to specifically target the C Difficile.
“It’s a ludicrous idea to impose fines like that.”
How the hospital will tackle superbugs THE C-Difficile action plan will concentrate on improving all wards on the A to D block at the Royal Bolton Hospital by January 2014.
So far, the hospital has replaced 107 mattresses, 37 commodes and installed new hand basins and floor laminates at four ward entrances, with another nine to go.
The £290,000 investment has also bought ‘fogging’ machines, which use Hydrogen Peroxide Vapour to decontaminate wards.
Bosses have have also installed sliding doors on older wards.
Ms Armstrong-Child said: “What I am really keen to do is to raise the awareness of infection control in the hospital and bring that message home that it is everybody’s business. It’s not about hierarchy and not just the staff’s responsibility — it’s patients and visitors too.
“We’ve increased the amount of reminders at the entrances to the hospital and wards to reinforce that message because it has to be a constant from everybody. This is not just a 12-month turnaround plan, this is about sustainable practices that will bring down the number of C-Difficile cases.”
The director of nursing has also commissioned an independent review of cleaning practices in the trust.
She added: “Good care is all about the basics and Bolton has had some challenges over the past year.
“The target is a real challenge there’s no doubt about it.”
How Royal Bolton will make improvements
THE C-Difficile action plan will concentrate on improving all wards on the A to D block at the Royal Bolton Hospital by January, 2014.
So far, the hospital has replaced 107 mattresses, 37 commodes and installed new hand basins and floor laminates at four ward entrances, with another nine to go.
The £290,000 investment has also bought ‘fogging’ machines, which use Hydrogen Peroxide Vapour to decontaminate wards.
Bosses have have also installed sliding doors on older wards. Ms Armstrong-Child said: “What I am really keen to do is to raise the awareness of infection control in the hospital and bring the message home that it is everybody’s business.
It’s not about hierarchy and not just the staff’s responsibility — it’s patients and visitors too.
“We’ve increased the amount of reminders at the entrances to the hospital and wards to reinforce that message because it has to be a constant from everybody.
This is not just a 12-month turnaround plan, this is about sustainable practices that will bring down the number of C-Difficile cases.”
The director of nursing has also commissioned an independent review of cleaning practices in the trust.
She added: “Good care is all about the basics and Bolton has had some challenges over the past year.
“The target is a real challenge there’s no doubt about it.”
This article is courtesy from The Bolton News.
Saturday, 2 November 2013
Shocking hospital blunders that should NEVER happen
Medics have made dozens of serious mistakes when treating patients across Greater Manchester over the last 18 months.
The preventable errors – known as ‘never events’ because the Department of Health say they should not happen – include an operation on the wrong part of a spine and swabs left in women after childbirth.
Figures obtained by the M.E.N. show 28 patients have been ‘never event’ victims in the region in just 18 months.
Central Manchester Hospitals
There were seven incidents at the Central Manchester Hospitals – which includes St Mary’s, MRI and Manchester Children’s Hospital – in 2012/13 and three so far in the current financial year.
This year’s incidents included one where a wrong mole was removed from a patient’s face.
Swabs were also left inside two patients – one after an operation in the ear, nose and throat department and one in the obstetrics and gynaecology.
Salford
There were two ‘never events’ in Salford last year including one where two drill ‘guides’ were left in a patient and another where the ‘incorrect level’ of a person’s spine was operated on.
There have been a further two events this year.
Wigan
There were also two never events at the Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Hospitals Trust in 2012/13 – root canal work on the wrong tooth and a swab left inside a patient’s knee.
Another took place this year where a patient received an overdose of a sedative.
The trust said that incident is under investigation and the patient has since recovered.
Royal Bolton Hospital
In two high-profile cases last year, swabs were left inside two women following childbirth at the Royal Bolton Hospital.
A third case of a swab being left inside a woman also happened last year. There has been one separate ‘never event’ at the hospital this year.
Pennine Acute Hospitals Trust
There were two never events at the Pennine Acute Hospitals Trust last year – where a ‘guide wire’ was left inside a patient after a line was fitted and where a swab was left in another patient. The trust runs North Manchester General Hospital, as well as hospitals in Bury, Rochdale and Oldham.
The Christie
An instrument was also left inside a patient at the Christie Hospital last year – the only never event to have taken place at the trust.
Stockport
There were two ‘never events’ at Stepping Hill Hospital in Stockport. A swab was left in a patient following a minor operation and the wrong strength of lens was used in an ophthalmology procedure.
Pennine Care
There was one ‘never event’ last year at Pennine Care, which provides a range of mental health and community services, when packing was left in a patient’s throat after a dental procedure.
Wythenshawe and Tameside
Wythenshawe and Tameside hospitals have had no ‘never events’ in the past 18 months.
Gill Edwards, a partner in the medical negligence department at law firm Pannone, who is also a former nurse, said: “These events should never happen.
“It’s important that hospitals learn from them to prevent them from happening again. It also important that patients are informed about what steps have been taken.”
NHS England is preparing its first set of quarterly lists of never events.
A spokeswoman said: “All never events require a robust investigation to identify why the failing has occurred and to ensure preventative measures are put in place to prevent re-occurrence.”
Have you been a victim of a ‘never event’? Call us on 0161 211 2323.
What the trusts say:
Central Manchester: All never events are pro-actively reported and investigated. Every never event is analysed and we are working hard to ensure similar events do not happen in the future. This work includes liaison with other hospitals to ensure learning across the NHS.
Salford Royal: We have investigated the circumstances around these never events and have made changes to our practices and procedures. Both of the patients received an immediate apology.
Stepping Hill: A full investigation was immediately launched after both events. As in any situation when an error occurs, additional levels of safeguards and checks were put in place which are above and beyond the standard procedures.
The Christie: The instrument was very small and the incident was graded as a '2' (minor) because the patient made a full recovery without adverse impact and went home on the expected day of discharge.
Royal Bolton: Our process for using and retrieving swabs has been thoroughly reviewed and changes made to theatre processes to make it more effective. New swab trays have been introduced... which make it easier to count swabs as they are retrieved.
Pennine Acute: Both events were fully investigated and the findings subjected to a high-level review. A number of changes had been made relating to retained swabs and instruments.
This article is courtesy from Manchester Evening News.
The preventable errors – known as ‘never events’ because the Department of Health say they should not happen – include an operation on the wrong part of a spine and swabs left in women after childbirth.
Figures obtained by the M.E.N. show 28 patients have been ‘never event’ victims in the region in just 18 months.
Central Manchester Hospitals
There were seven incidents at the Central Manchester Hospitals – which includes St Mary’s, MRI and Manchester Children’s Hospital – in 2012/13 and three so far in the current financial year.
This year’s incidents included one where a wrong mole was removed from a patient’s face.
Swabs were also left inside two patients – one after an operation in the ear, nose and throat department and one in the obstetrics and gynaecology.
Salford
There were two ‘never events’ in Salford last year including one where two drill ‘guides’ were left in a patient and another where the ‘incorrect level’ of a person’s spine was operated on.
There have been a further two events this year.
Wigan
There were also two never events at the Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Hospitals Trust in 2012/13 – root canal work on the wrong tooth and a swab left inside a patient’s knee.
Another took place this year where a patient received an overdose of a sedative.
The trust said that incident is under investigation and the patient has since recovered.
Royal Bolton Hospital
In two high-profile cases last year, swabs were left inside two women following childbirth at the Royal Bolton Hospital.
A third case of a swab being left inside a woman also happened last year. There has been one separate ‘never event’ at the hospital this year.
Pennine Acute Hospitals Trust
There were two never events at the Pennine Acute Hospitals Trust last year – where a ‘guide wire’ was left inside a patient after a line was fitted and where a swab was left in another patient. The trust runs North Manchester General Hospital, as well as hospitals in Bury, Rochdale and Oldham.
The Christie
An instrument was also left inside a patient at the Christie Hospital last year – the only never event to have taken place at the trust.
Stockport
There were two ‘never events’ at Stepping Hill Hospital in Stockport. A swab was left in a patient following a minor operation and the wrong strength of lens was used in an ophthalmology procedure.
Pennine Care
There was one ‘never event’ last year at Pennine Care, which provides a range of mental health and community services, when packing was left in a patient’s throat after a dental procedure.
Wythenshawe and Tameside
Wythenshawe and Tameside hospitals have had no ‘never events’ in the past 18 months.
Gill Edwards, a partner in the medical negligence department at law firm Pannone, who is also a former nurse, said: “These events should never happen.
“It’s important that hospitals learn from them to prevent them from happening again. It also important that patients are informed about what steps have been taken.”
NHS England is preparing its first set of quarterly lists of never events.
A spokeswoman said: “All never events require a robust investigation to identify why the failing has occurred and to ensure preventative measures are put in place to prevent re-occurrence.”
Have you been a victim of a ‘never event’? Call us on 0161 211 2323.
What the trusts say:
Central Manchester: All never events are pro-actively reported and investigated. Every never event is analysed and we are working hard to ensure similar events do not happen in the future. This work includes liaison with other hospitals to ensure learning across the NHS.
Salford Royal: We have investigated the circumstances around these never events and have made changes to our practices and procedures. Both of the patients received an immediate apology.
Stepping Hill: A full investigation was immediately launched after both events. As in any situation when an error occurs, additional levels of safeguards and checks were put in place which are above and beyond the standard procedures.
The Christie: The instrument was very small and the incident was graded as a '2' (minor) because the patient made a full recovery without adverse impact and went home on the expected day of discharge.
Royal Bolton: Our process for using and retrieving swabs has been thoroughly reviewed and changes made to theatre processes to make it more effective. New swab trays have been introduced... which make it easier to count swabs as they are retrieved.
Pennine Acute: Both events were fully investigated and the findings subjected to a high-level review. A number of changes had been made relating to retained swabs and instruments.
This article is courtesy from Manchester Evening News.
Friday, 1 November 2013
Teenager forced to have a hysterectomy at 19 receives five-figure payout from hospital that failed to treat her infection
A young mother has been given a five-figure payout after she was forced to have a hysterectomy shortly after giving birth - because doctors failed to treat an infection she developed.
Hayley Sanders was 19 when she had the hysterectomy at Birmingham's Heartlands Hospital, just days after giving birth to Jayden by emergency C-section.
Staff at the hospital carried out multiple internal examinations during the birth on December 27, 2009, all of which could have introduced an infection.
But they failed to act when Ms Sanders developed a high temperature.
She was discharged on December 30, but just two days later, on New Year's Day, was rushed back to hospital with abdominal pain and spent days in the high dependency unit.
She fell into a coma as her body was taken over by a bacterial infection.
Doctors were left with no choice but to perform a complete hysterectomy to save her life 13 days after she was readmitted to the hospital.
Ms Sanders later discovered that she would not have needed the hysterectomy if she had been given antibiotics when she first fell ill.
Ms Sanders, now aged 23, from Chelmsley Wood, has criticised the care she received at the hospital and said she is ‘disgusted’ at Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust for offering no apology.
She received a five-figure settlement from Trust.
The money will cover the former bank insurance worker’s past and future care, plus her loss of earnings.
She says that she is no longer able to work, requires regular therapy sessions to help her come to terms with what happened, and needs further surgery because her scar causes her a lot of pain.
Ms Sanders said: ‘When I heard the evidence I was absolutely appalled.
‘I couldn’t believe that if staff had only given me antibiotics I would never have needed a hysterectomy.
‘I would have been able to make the most of bonding with Jayden in the first weeks of his life and I would have, one day, been able to give him a little brother or sister.’
Emma Rush, a medical law expert at Irwin Mitchell’s Birmingham office, said: ‘This is a horrific case that has had a devastating impact on Hayley’s life.
‘Hospital staff missed multiple opportunities to recognise that Hayley’s high temperature was the result of an infection that is not uncommon in maternity patients and that simple antibiotics would have treated her.
‘Instead she became critically ill as the infection took over her body and the only option of saving her was to perform a hysterectomy to remove the source of the infection.
‘This is obviously a horrendous ordeal for any person to go through, but particularly difficult for a 19-year-old who hoped to have more children.
‘As well as offering Hayley the apology she deserves, the Trust must also prove that lessons have been learnt as we have no confidence that improvements have been made.
‘We would expect to see further training for staff in recognising the symptoms of infection and administering the appropriate treatment to ensure the same life-changing errors cannot happen again.’
A Heart of England NHS Trust spokeswoman said: ‘A detailed action plan is developed to improve and learn from the findings of investigations and this is monitored and inspected by senior teams of doctors, nurses and midwifes.
Hayley Sanders was 19 when she had the hysterectomy at Birmingham's Heartlands Hospital, just days after giving birth to Jayden by emergency C-section.
Staff at the hospital carried out multiple internal examinations during the birth on December 27, 2009, all of which could have introduced an infection.
But they failed to act when Ms Sanders developed a high temperature.
She was discharged on December 30, but just two days later, on New Year's Day, was rushed back to hospital with abdominal pain and spent days in the high dependency unit.
She fell into a coma as her body was taken over by a bacterial infection.
Doctors were left with no choice but to perform a complete hysterectomy to save her life 13 days after she was readmitted to the hospital.
Ms Sanders later discovered that she would not have needed the hysterectomy if she had been given antibiotics when she first fell ill.
Ms Sanders, now aged 23, from Chelmsley Wood, has criticised the care she received at the hospital and said she is ‘disgusted’ at Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust for offering no apology.
She received a five-figure settlement from Trust.
The money will cover the former bank insurance worker’s past and future care, plus her loss of earnings.
She says that she is no longer able to work, requires regular therapy sessions to help her come to terms with what happened, and needs further surgery because her scar causes her a lot of pain.
Ms Sanders said: ‘When I heard the evidence I was absolutely appalled.
‘I couldn’t believe that if staff had only given me antibiotics I would never have needed a hysterectomy.
‘I would have been able to make the most of bonding with Jayden in the first weeks of his life and I would have, one day, been able to give him a little brother or sister.’
Emma Rush, a medical law expert at Irwin Mitchell’s Birmingham office, said: ‘This is a horrific case that has had a devastating impact on Hayley’s life.
‘Hospital staff missed multiple opportunities to recognise that Hayley’s high temperature was the result of an infection that is not uncommon in maternity patients and that simple antibiotics would have treated her.
‘Instead she became critically ill as the infection took over her body and the only option of saving her was to perform a hysterectomy to remove the source of the infection.
‘This is obviously a horrendous ordeal for any person to go through, but particularly difficult for a 19-year-old who hoped to have more children.
‘As well as offering Hayley the apology she deserves, the Trust must also prove that lessons have been learnt as we have no confidence that improvements have been made.
‘We would expect to see further training for staff in recognising the symptoms of infection and administering the appropriate treatment to ensure the same life-changing errors cannot happen again.’
A Heart of England NHS Trust spokeswoman said: ‘A detailed action plan is developed to improve and learn from the findings of investigations and this is monitored and inspected by senior teams of doctors, nurses and midwifes.
‘Unfortunately, Hayley Sanders suffered complications during the course of the delivery of her son.
‘Whilst no admissions of liability were made, a financial settlement was achieved and we wish Hayley and her family all the best for the future.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
‘Whilst no admissions of liability were made, a financial settlement was achieved and we wish Hayley and her family all the best for the future.’
This article is courtesy from The Daily Mail.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)