Health

Overview

The complainant raised concerns about her dental treatment and the redress she obtained.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  the treatment provided was inadequate (upheld); and
• (b)  the compensation was insufficient (upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the dentist makes a payment of £3020 to the complainant and undertakes further training.

The dentist has accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) raised concerns about the way in which a dentist (the Dentist) had removed her and her children from the practice list.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that Mrs C and her children were removed improperly from the Dentist's Practice list (no finding).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Dentist familiarise himself with the regulations governing removal of NHS patients from practice lists.

The Dentist has accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised concerns about the failure by Inverurie Hospital (the Hospital) to admit his wife to a palliative care suite.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  staff failed to communicate effectively with Mrs C's GP prior to transfer (upheld);
• (b)  staff made ineffective use of the palliative care suite (not upheld);
• (c)  staff failed to communicate effectively with Mrs C's family (no finding); and
• (d)  the nursing records failed to comply with the regulations (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board:

• (i)  apologises to the family for their communication failures; and
• (ii)  provides evidence to show the new documentation tool has been audited to demonstrate that nursing records adhere to minimum standards.

Overview

The Ombudsman received a number of complaints from parents (the Parents) of patients at the Practice about delayed orthodontic treatment at the Practice.  The Practice had advised the Parents that the delays were not the fault of the Practice but NHS National Services Scotland (NHSNSS) which must give the Practice approval to commence orthodontic treatment.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  there was a delay by the Practice in carrying out orthodontic treatment (not upheld); and
• (b)  there was a delay by NHSNSS in granting approval for orthodontic work to commence (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Practice and NHSNSS continue meaningful discussions to decide the circumstances where radiographs are required in individual cases which require prior approval for the Practice to commence orthodontic treatment.

The Practice and NHSNSS have accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly.

Overview

The Ombudsman received a number of complaints from parents (the Parents) of patients at the Practice about delayed orthodontic treatment at the Practice.  The Practice had advised the Parents that the delays were not the fault of the Practice but NHS National Services Scotland (NHSNSS) which must give the Practice approval to commence orthodontic treatment.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  there was a delay by the Practice in carrying out orthodontic treatment (not upheld); and
• (b)  there was a delay by NHSNSS in granting approval for orthodontic work to commence (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Practice and NHSNSS continue meaningful discussions to decide the circumstances where radiographs are required in individual cases which require prior approval for the Practice to commence orthodontic treatment.

The Practice and NHSNSS have accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly.

Overview

An Advocacy Worker (Ms C) complained on behalf of the family of an elderly woman (Mrs A) who had been a patient at Glasgow Royal Infirmary (the Hospital).  She raised a number of concerns about the nursing care provided, communication with the family and procedures for discharge.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)  there was a lack of communication with the family, in particular in relation to whether or not Mrs A had a stroke while in hospital (partially upheld);
• (b)  the standard of nursing care provided by some nursing staff was poor (not upheld);
• (c)  there was no effective planning of Mrs A's discharge from hospital (upheld); and
• (d)  pancreatitis was given as the secondary cause of death even though the family's understanding was that this condition had been successfully treated (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board:

• (i)  highlight to staff the need to manage the expectations of the families of patients and to be aware of the need to communicate in non-technical language and provide clear explanations;
• (ii)  undertake an audit of the new care plan documentation and share the results of that audit with her;
• (iii)  apologise to Mrs A's family for their failure to carry out their own discharge policy effectively and the inconvenience, distress and concern that this caused; and
• (iv)  audit their discharge policy to ensure that it is now being fully implemented.

The Board have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complaint concerns the care and treatment of the complainant (Mr C)'s late wife (Mrs C) by a doctor (Doctor 1) from an out-of-hours General Practitioner Service (the Service) in December 2002.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that Doctor 1 failed to provide Mrs C with adequate care and treatment during a home consultation on 31 December 2002 (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that:

• (i)  Doctor 1 issue Mr C and his family with a full formal apology for the failures identified in this Report; and
• (ii)  the apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman's guidance note on 'apology' (which sets out what is meant and what is required for a meaningful apology).

Doctor 1 has accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C), through his Advocacy Worker (Tthe Advocacy Worker), raised a concern about the circumstances which led to him discharging himself from hospital.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that staff failed to take into account Mr C's mental health problems and as a result he discharged himself from hospital (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) was concerned that his 86-year old late uncle (Mr A)'s chances of survival were compromised by the GP's late referral to hospital and by Uist & Barra Hospital (the Hospital)'s care and treatment.  His uncle died during his time in the Hospital.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated concern:

• (a)      the timing of the hospital referral (no finding); and
• (b)      the Hospital's care and treatment (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mrs C) raised a number of concerns about the treatment her late father (Mr A) received at the Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley (the Hospital) from 2 July 2005 to 11 July 2005.  This included whether it was appropriate for staff to prescribe oral rather than intravenous antibiotics and whether account was taken of Mr A's pre-existing medical condition prior to the hospital admission.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that Mr A was provided with inadequate treatment and staff failed to take into account his pre-existing medical condition (partially upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman recommends that the Board consider the development of Board-wide bereavement guidance and inform her of the outcome of the audit of nursing records.

The Board have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.