25^th August 2013 [blog No. 31]

Hello again, it’s me, Peggy

The Health Service Ombudsman responded to my husband’s request for a Review in a letter dated 19^th August 2013 denying him a Review of his case. See copy of letter below.

Listed below are my husband’s responses as put in the Request for a Review Form as sent onto the Health Service Ombudsman by email on 12/8/2013.

Re: Your complaint about the prescription of lipitor by Dr Louis (Cardiologist) and his assertion that you caused your own stroke symptoms through electing to come off Lipitor.

a) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that my wife had advised Dr Louis that I was intolerant to Statins.

b) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that my blood test results showed my cholesterol LDL/HDL to be within normal levels.

c) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that Dr Louis should have recognised that if Dr Louis had concerns over my cholesterol levels he should have resorted to prescribe an eating plan as opposed to Lipitor/Statins, him being made aware of my intolerance to Statins.

d) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that I was having problems with my speech as well as headaches and muscle pains and these side effects were a result of being prescribed Lipitor. The symptoms subsided in time after my GP had stopped me taking Lipitor and after my GP having diagnosed me as having suffered a stroke on 6 September 2010.

e) The GP’s actions were suspect when he diagnosed me as having suffered a stroke on 6/9/2010 and then referred me onto the RDGH Stroke Clinic to have blood tests 2-days later and a CT scan 10-days hence, as opposed to requesting a Blue Light. What happened to the F.A.S.T. NHS procedure when a patient is considered to have suffered a stroke??? According to the RDGH Stroke Clinic Consultant he CT scan results were useless after such a long period of time. It shows that both my wife and I have problems when seeking proper corrective treatment from our NHS! When I sought further advice in accordance with the suggestion of our Local MP, it was recommended on no less than three separate occasions that I should change my GP. And we (my wife and I) did.

f) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that a stroke is definitely a well-known side effect of taking Statins/Lipitor and should have been treated as such by Dr Louis.

g) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that the RDGH in their Complaints procedure and when reporting on the contents of the sound recordings provided, paraphrased what was heard/said in their transcribing of the sound recordings with intent to mislead.

h) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that the letter from Mr Lambertz to GP showed the contempt consultants/doctors had for me as a patient, and there was no way that I was to be able to access proper corrective treatment from the RDGH. Further complaints with the RDGH as attached here also show this to be a FACT!

i) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that Sleep apnoea is not a medical condition proper, and that it was only used as a get-out in preventing me receiving treatment.

j) The Ombudsman's investigator did not consider that after all said and done the hernia operation was undertaken at the Sheffield Northern General Hospital with only a one-night stay as an inpatient. It was undertaken without all the palaver under a general anaesthetic and within two months of them receiving the referral from my new GP. I allege that what went off at the RDGH was just a load of Bull****. The SNGH offered me Gold Standard Treatment albeit with the hernia having been waiting repair since 2005 they were landed with what had become an extremely complicated op. The rupture had gone down into the scrotum and part of my bowel had adhered to the right testicle. The operating surgeon advised that he might have to remove the right testicle completely. I suffered no side effects what-so-ever from having the general aesthetic.

k) Subsequently, I had been referred to the RDGH for a colonoscopy, which they performed on 9th July 2012. They also had instructions from the consultant to undertake haemorrhoid banding at the same time. After having this procedure I was left with more severe rectal bleeding and bowel pain than I had had previously. I lost all confidence in the RDGH and I requested of my GP that he refer me to another hospital. I was referred onto the Hallamshire Hospital in Sheffield for assessment of the rectal bleeding. At the consultation the consultant offered me the option of having 3 haemorrhoids banding at that consultation, and I agreed. I explained how I was of the opinion that banding procedure had not taken place at the RDGH at the time of the colonoscopy. He advised me prior to him undertaking the procedure himself that I would have definitely known if they had done it. And I can assure you here and now that they definitely had not done it albeit the RDGH say they have reported on three separate reports. See copy docs attached here.      

l) Furthermore, and further proof that my wife and I cannot obtain proper corrective treatment from the RDGH is the time (27 March 2013) when my wife had to call for an ambulance due to me collapsing at home with chest pains at around 8pm. I was taken to the RDGH, had blood tests done and kept in a cubicle until 2.30am. I was then approached by a doctor who informed me that they were having problems obtaining blood results. She told me to go home and to return if I became worse. When I asked how I was supposed to do that she said “get a taxi”!

My Husband went onto say in his Request for a Review that the subsequent complaint to the RDGH was whitewashed over just the same as this complaint was.       

Now, according to the Article in the Daily Telegraph on 13^th August 2013 (See copy of Article below as taken from the Daily Telegraph) Heath Service Ombudsman Dame Julie Mellor states; “Patients failed by toxic NHS cocktail”. It appears to us that Dame Julie Mellor’s Investigation Team are no better that the NHS when investigating complaints. It’s time she got her own house in order because she says that only 1 in 10 complaints about the NHS are investigated by the Health Service Ombudsman, and I say that that figure is far from being acceptable! What do you think??

By Laura Donnelly [Health Correspondent]

PATIENTS who suffer harm or poor care in hospitals are being failed by a "toxic cocktail" within the health service which means complaints go unheard and lessons unlearnt, the NHS Ombudsman has warned.

 

Dame Julie Mellor told The Daily Telegraph that patients often felt too frightened to complain for fear of receiving even worse treatment, while those who did encountered a wall of defensiveness from staff.

 

A report by the NHS Ombudsman, which investigates complaints when hospitals are accused of failing to handle them fairly, is calling for changes so that more concerns are acted on promptly, and action is taken before care is jeopardised. They include:

 

Access to a free patients' advice service 24 hours a day;

Each patient to be given the name of a senior person - usually the ward sister - as the first contact tor concerns;

Regular measurement of feedback from patients, so hospitals can compare their handling of complaints and make improvements.

 

The recommendations have been submitted to an independent review of hospital complaints by Ann Clwyd, a Labour MP whose husband died in hospital after a series of failings. The report is due next month.

 

It follows research by the NHS Ombudsman which found patients, carers and hospital staff were confused about how the system worked, while the NHS culture meant that too often, those who suffered harm were denied a simple apology.

 

As well as adding to patients' distress, it meant hospitals were failing to learn lessons from major tragedies, which were then more likely to be repeated, Dame Julie said.

 

She said: "What we found was that there is a toxic cocktail - patients felt reluctant to complain, because they can fear it will affect the care they get - and that if they do, they are met with a culture of defensiveness, where they don't get the explanations they need, and the opportunity is lost to learn really powerful insights, which could improve the NHS."

 

Research has found that more than half of those who consider complaining about the NHS do not do so, with many put off because they expect the process to be bureaucratic, while others believe it will make no difference.

 

Dame Julie, who was appointed last year, said that people contacted the NHS Ombudsman in desperation.

 

"There are three core things that people come to us about," she said. "Number one is - 'I just can't get a decent explanation, I really don't know what happened and actually maybe if I had a proper explanation that would sort it for me - I just want to know.'"

 "The second is when something has gone wrong, but there is a lack of acknowledgement of mistakes, and inadequate apology. The third is when there is insufficient remedy. I think that has really struck me about why the public complain, they do so because they want to prevent the same thing happening to someone else."

 

A study by the Ombudsman has found that staff are reluctant to properly investigate complaints because they are afraid of challenging the NHS hierarchy, or of drawing attention to failings by more senior colleagues, or that they will be punished for admitting to failings in patient care.

 

"This defensiveness is one of the most important things we need to overcome - that is about changing the culture, not about the procedure,"

 

Dame Julie said Patients who had complained reported that apologies felt insincere, and they felt their accounts of poor care were "manipulated" to minimise NHS failings.

 

The research found that one woman was advised to complain in writing about concerns that her mother was not being washed or helped to go to the lavatory in hospital. She was told her complaint would be acknowledged within 28 days. "My mum could have died in that amount of time," she said.

 

The Ombudsman has been criticised for not examining enough of the complaints which are passed its way.

 

Dame Julie last month promised a ten-fold rise in the numbers of cases which the Ombudsman examines but this still means only one in 10 complaints would be fully investigated,

 

She said it was "crucial" that hospitals improve their own systems, because accusations of poor care should be dealt with as quickly as possible before a situation worsened.

However, in my own case that has been set before the Health Service Ombudsman for a Review of my case (It’s been with the Ombudsman for almost two years now) and after an alleged breach of confidentially on their part, they first sent a letter asking me to give the KPPCC (the GP Practice) an opportunity to settle the matter on a financial basis but after seeking advice from a solicitor at our MP’s suggestion, the KPPCC just ignored the request for a settlement.

Subsequently, the Ombudsman requested further information, and after they had received the further information they responded saying that they were unable to review my case because I had provided them with too much information.

Subsequently, they sent me a further letter asking me what amount of compensation I was expecting to receive to satisfy my case. Our Local MP, when he saw the letter, said it was a trick because how could I in a position to set quantum on such a matter, and in any event had I set the amount  too high they would have turned my case down for that reason. So, it was a “trick”, yes?

However, some weeks ago our Local MP took the case on-board himself due to my frustration with the Ombudsman’s Office, and he himself has now received a letter dated 16^th August 2013 from the Ombudsman’s Office basically kicking my case into the long grass!!

See copy letters below dated 23^rd August 2013 from our Local MP, The Rt. Hon Mr Kevin J Barron MP, to me and a copy of the letter to Gwen Harrison at the PHSO.

This true story continues …….

NB: All copyrights reserved