Concerns about a lack of care and treatment on a gynaecology ward and poor complaint handling

Summary 390 |

Ms B complained that she shouldn't have been discharged five days after her miscarriage, and that there were delays in her treatment, unnecessary procedures, and a lack of care.


What happened

Ms B was admitted to hospital after suffering a miscarriage. She understood that she would have an operation but this did not happen. Her infection and urinary retention were treated with antibiotics and catheterisation and she was discharged after five days. Ms B had to be readmitted the next day and received further antibiotics, to which she felt she had an allergic reaction. She was concerned about the time it took to organise a kidney scan and about being catheterised a number of times. She was discharged with a catheter in place and told that a district nurse would visit her at home to provide catheter care. However, but the nurse did not arrive.

Ms B complained to the Trust and was concerned about the delay in responses and an error in her medical records.

What we found

The treatment with antibiotics, catheterisation and pain relief was appropriate when Ms B was first admitted to hospital.   There was no need to perform an operation. The hospital was correct to discharge Ms B as her observations were normal.

There was no evidence that Ms B suffered an allergic reaction to antibiotics when she was later readmitted to hospital, and the timing of the kidney scan was reasonable. Ms B's catheter care was correct and all care and treatment was clinically reasonable.

Ms B was told to expect a visit from a district nurse after discharge but this did not happen because Ms B was outside the Trust's catchment area. This caused Ms B concern and the Trust passed on to us its sincere apologies for this.

The Trust highlighted this issue to all ward matrons and asked them to make sure that staff follow instructions in the discharge summary and are aware of guidelines about district nurse visits where the patient is outside the catchment area.

The Trust's response to the complaint failed to notice an important correction in the records and did not act in accordance with its complaints policy. There were delays in acknowledging and responding to the complaint.

Putting it right

The Trust apologised to Ms B and paid her £200 in recognition of the upset and concern she suffered as a result of its overall handling of the complaint.

Health or Parliamentary
Health
Organisations we investigated

Croydon Health Services NHS Trust

Location

Greater London

Complainants' concerns ?

Delayed replying to complaint

Replied with inaccurate or incomplete information

Result

Apology

Compensation for non-financial loss