R was 30 when he started to suffer from acute abdominal pain. He saw an out of hours GP who suspected appendicitis and referred him to the surgical team at the local hospital. Here he was noted to have a raised temperature, an increased heart rate and, after blood tests were performed, an increased white cell count. Despite this, he was diagnosed with constipation and discharged home with laxatives.
By the following day, R’s pain had worsened and he returned to the hospital, this time to the Emergency Department. He was again diagnosed with constipation and discharged home with laxatives.
R struggled on despite being very unwell and sought advice from his GP. As R’s condition was getting worse rather than better, 10 days after last being seen at hospital, his GP arranged for him to have further blood tests. These were very concerning showing high inflammatory markers. R was sent straight back to hospital where he underwent a CT scan, revealing a burst appendix and pelvic abscess. He required emergency open surgery to remove the appendix, which had by that point liquefied, and an ileostomy. This was reversed 14 months later although he continues to suffer from urgency which restricts his social life as he always needs a toilet close by.
It was the evidence of our experts, a surgeon and a specialist in emergency medicine, that on both occasions R presented to hospital, he should have been admitted for further investigations which would have shown him to be suffering from appendicitis. His appendix would not have ruptured by this point so it would have been a straight forward operation to remove the appendix which would have been performed by keyhole surgery. He would avoided the need for an ileostomy and the associated scarring from this and the open surgery he underwent.
The hospital denied liability and it was necessary to issue Court proceedings. They again reiterated their denial of liability in their Defence but shortly after, accepted R’s offer to settle his claim for £50,000.
Mistakes in healthcare have a profound effect on every aspect of a person’s life. Not only did R have to struggle with the pain of his injuries and the difficulties with his stoma, he was also unable to work for a considerable amount of time which affected him financially. Whilst the damages he received will never fully compensate him for what he has gone through and continues to have to deal with, it has helped him get financially back on track and gives him the opportunity to undergo further surgery to improve the significant scarring from his operations.
If you or a family member think you have received substandard care from a medical professional and would like some free, no obligation advice from one of our solicitors, please do not hesitate to contact us on 01642 231110.
Kathryn Watson – May 2020