Trust's poor complaint handling fails to reassure

What happened

Mr H had a total left hip replacement operation in late summer 2010. After the surgery, he experienced pain, which he described as being different to the pain he had felt after his right hip replacement. He had an X-ray and a scan, but these did not show any abnormalities.

Mr H was discharged from hospital nine days later. He then had physiotherapy and further investigations into the cause of his pain.

An X-ray taken in early spring 2011 did not show any problems with the hip replacement. However, in summer 2011, following a further X-ray, it was identified that Mr H's hip replacement had become progressively loose.

The Trust carried out surgery to put this right in autumn 2011.

Mr H considered that there were failings in the way the hip replacement surgery was performed and that the Trust should have identified the loosening of the hip replacement much sooner, given the pain that he had reported.

Mr H complained to the Trust, which took over four months to respond. Mr H was not happy with the Trust's response and sent a further letter to the Trust. The Trust took five months to arrange a meeting with Mr H and then a further month to send him a written response.

What we found

The hip replacement surgery was carried out appropriately. It is normal to experience a certain degree of pain following such procedures and the clinical examinations and investigations did not reveal that there was anything wrong with the hip replacement.

We found that the first clinical sign that something was wrong was in summer 2011 and the subsequent treatment to put this right was appropriate and happened within a reasonable time frame.

However, the Trust's complaint handling was poor. We acknowledged that it can take time to arrange for staff to attend meetings, but there were excessive delays in this case. There was also no evidence that the Trust had kept Mr H informed about any delays or given any indication of when he could expect a response. The failings in the Trust's complaint handling were unlikely to have reassured Mr H about his clinical care.

Putting it right

The Trust acknowledged the failings in complaint handling and apologised for these. It paid Mr H £250 in recognition of the failings.