Page Section: Left Content Column
Page Section: Centre Content Column
Delay in provision of services to patient with vascular problems (09HDC01146)
Download Delay in provision of services to patient with vascular problems (09HDC01146) (PDF 137Kb)
(09HDC01146, 28 April
2011)
District health board ~ Public hospital ~ General surgeon ~
Surgical registrar ~ Vascular surgeon ~ Ischaemia ~ Amputation ~
Transfer ~ Rights 4(1), 4(5)
A woman complained about the care provided to her 79-year-old
father by a public hospital. The man was referred to the emergency
department with acute pain in his left leg and a cold, blue, left
foot. He was diagnosed with impending ischaemia and admitted to
hospital.
The man was initially under the care of a general surgeon, and
there was a delay of ten days before he was seen by a general
surgeon with an interest in vascular surgery ("the operating
surgeon"). The general surgeon relied on inaccurate information
provided by the registrar about when the operating surgeon would
return from leave.
A week later the man underwent surgery for an aneurysm behind
his left knee. Following the surgery, the operating surgeon again
went on leave but failed to hand over care to the on-call
consultant. The man suffered complications but the significance of
his symptoms was not appreciated by the registrar. After several
days the man was referred to a vascular surgeon at another district
health board, but his leg could not be saved and he required an
above-knee amputation.
It was held that the first general surgeon breached Right 4(1)
for failing to seek specialist advice within a reasonable time. The
operating surgeon breached Right 4(5) for failing to adequately
hand over care. The registrar breached Right 4(1) for failing to
verify the information he provided to the first general surgeon
about the absence of the operating surgeon, keep adequate records,
or adequately assess the patient.
The district health board was found to have adequate systems in
place and was not found in breach of the Code. The district health
board took reasonable steps to enable the three providers to
provide safe services, and was not vicariously liable for their
breaches. However, adverse comment was made about the failures of
nursing and junior medical staff to report their concerns to the
on-call consultant as the man's condition deteriorated, and the
need to develop a culture in which the asking of questions and
reporting of concerns is expected and accepted from all members of
the multidisciplinary team.
Page Section: Right Content Column
Top of Page