Wednesday 21 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 201701995

  • Case ref:
    201701995
  • Date:
    April 2018
  • Body:
    Tayside NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health
  • Outcome:
    Some upheld, no recommendations
  • Subject:
    clinical treatment / diagnosis

Summary

Ms C, an advocacy and support worker, complained on behalf of her client (Mr A) about the care and treatment he received at Ninewells Hospital. Mr A suffered an injury in which his fingertip was severed at the joint and he wanted to have surgery to have it reattached. However, he was referred for terminalisation surgery (where the finger is shortened and the remaining soft tissue is used to cover the amputated finger stump) instead. Following the surgery, Mr A experienced severe pain and his injury did not heal as quickly as he had hoped. Ms C complained that the board failed to provide Mr A with appropriate medical treatment and that nursing staff failed to appropriately assess and manage Mr A's pain before discharging him home.

We took independent medical advice from a plastic and hand surgeon, and from a nurse. The plastic and hand surgeon adviser considered that terminalisation surgery was the appropriate treatment for Mr A's injury. They explained that the outcome of reattachment surgery was likely to be poor and had higher risks than terminalisation surgery. Therefore, we did not uphold this aspect of Ms C's complaint.

The board accepted that Mr A's pain was not assessed and managed by nursing staff prior to his discharge and apologised for this. They explained that action had been taken to ensure learning from this case. The nursing adviser considered the nursing care was unreasonable so we upheld this aspect of Ms C's complaint. We asked the board to provide evidence of the action they have taken.

Updated: December 2, 2018