Decision Report 201605572

  • Case ref:
    201605572
  • Date:
    January 2018
  • Body:
    Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board - Acute Services Division
  • Sector:
    Health
  • Outcome:
    Not upheld, recommendations
  • Subject:
    clinical treatment / diagnosis

Summary

Ms C complained to us about the care and treatment her former partner (Mr A) had received at the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital and the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre after he was diagnosed with cancer. Mr A had died within three months of being diagnosed. We took independent advice from a consultant clinical oncologist. We found that there were no failings in the diagnosis or management of Mr A's cancer and that the treatment provided to him was reasonable and appropriate. We did not uphold this aspect of Ms C's complaint.

Ms C also complained that the board had unreasonably failed to retain Mr A's personal possessions for collection by his next of kin after his death. We took independent nursing advice. We found that the actions of the board in relation to this matter had been reasonable and did not uphold this aspect of the complaint.

Ms C also raised concerns that the board had failed to assist her with investigating a link between Mr A's cancer and their son's health. Based on the evidence available, we considered that the board had reasonably tried to assist Ms C with this matter. We did not uphold this aspect of her complaint. However, we found that the board had not handled Ms C's complaint regarding this appropriately and we made a recommendation in relation to this.

Ms C also complained about the board's handling of her request for Mr A's medical records. She complained that the board had not given her the imaging and scans they held for Mr A. The board had told Ms C that they would not release some of the records because Mr A had told a consultant that he did not want them to be disclosed. We found that the consultant should have made a note of Mr A's request in his records. However, we did not identify any other failings and, on balance, we did not uphold this complaint.

Recommendations

What we asked the organisation to do in this case:

  • Apologise to Ms C for not handling her complaint appropriately. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at https://www.spso.org.uk/leaflets-and-guidance.

We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.

Updated: March 13, 2018