Tuesday 20 October: Complaint form offline

The supplier of our case management system has confirmed that they are experiencing a significant technical issue.

At present, we have no access to the case management system and we are currently unable to provide updates on existing cases.

We are planning on the basis that this could continue for a period of time including for the remainder of this week.

If you would like to check if your complaint is ready for the SPSO or enquire about making a new complaint, please complete our Complaint Checker.  

Please be assured we are doing all we can and will provide updates on our website. 

For an all service update: Service update | SPSO

Decision report 201104631

  • Case ref:
    201104631
  • Date:
    March 2013
  • Body:
    Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health
  • Outcome:
    Upheld, recommendations
  • Subject:
    clinical treatment / diagnosis

Summary

Following a laparoscopic hysterectomy (keyhole surgery to remove the organs and surrounding tissue of the reproductive system), Miss C began experiencing pain in her back and left leg. She was kept in hospital for five weeks and diagnosed with sciatic nerve damage (damage to the nerves of the lower back area). She told us that she continues to suffer from these problems and has been told that it could take two years for her to regain normal function. She complained that, despite corresponding with the board and attending several appointments, she has not received an explanation as to what caused these problems.

Our investigation found that the board had carried out appropriate investigations to identify the problems Miss C was experiencing and that her pain was likely to be caused by sciatic nerve damage following her surgery. This was a rare complication and not something the board could take particular precautions to avoid. We found that, although the board were not clear about what was causing Miss C's pain and carried out a number of tests to establish this, there was a lack of evidence to show that they had explained why they were carrying out these tests, the conclusion reached, and the likely outcome. For this reason, we upheld this complaint.

Recommendations

We recommended that the board:

  • give Miss C a copy of her consultant's letter to her GP; and
  • arrange for Miss C to meet with neurology staff to discuss her condition and likely outcome, if she wishes to do so.

 

Updated: March 13, 2018