An elderly man lost almost all of the vision in his right eye after errors with appointments led to him missing nearly a year's worth of crucial treatment to prevent glaucoma. The man, who was 83 at the time, had been seen by eye specialists after a fall in early 2017.
He was due to be seen again in four to six months. But neither he nor his GP was informed of that fact and arrangements for the review were not made when he was discharged from hospital to a care home, reports Hull Live.
Nearly a year later, in January 2018, by which time he had been discharged back to his own home, the man went to see his optician due to 'fogged' vision. It was then that he was told he had advanced glaucoma in his right eye.
It had become so bad that he was recorded as having 'hand movements only', meaning he could only detect that objects were there and not see any detail. As part of a legal case led by medical negligence specialists Hudgell Solicitors, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust admitted its failure to arrange the follow-up examination within four to six months after he was seen at Hull Royal Infirmary was a breach of its duty of care.
It also admitted that, had it done so, on a balance of probabilities, the error would have been recognised and treatment through eye drops would have been provided, thereby reducing the deterioration of his vision loss. The Trust apologised for the error.
The man, now 88, of Beverley, said: “My eyesight just gradually got worse, but because I have such good eyesight in my left eye, it compensates for it and so it was not immediately noticeable, I just found myself struggling to focus on things. When I went to the optician he said my right eye was on a one-way course to blindness and that there was not a specialist in the world who could reverse it by that stage.
"Now when I close my left eye I can only see darkness, as the right eye doesn’t work at all. I’ve had to adapt and I do struggle with close focus. I have medications that I have to pour out and measure and that is a real struggle. I’m lucky to have such good vision still in my left eye. If that was to get worse I’d really struggle.”
Subscribe here for the latest news where you live
The man said he was ‘not one for seeking compensation and going to court’, but was advised by a family friend who works in the health sector to seek legal advice, to ensure lessons are learned.
“I wasn’t going to do anything,” he explained, “but I was urged to take legal action as this person, who is actually quite high up at a health provider, said things like this needed to be addressed in such a big organisation, to prevent it happening again. Hopefully that will be the case. I’m really pleased with the settlement and intend to make good use of it by going on a cruise after a difficult couple of years going through this and then Covid and the lockdowns.”
Solicitor Matthew Gascoyne, of Hudgell Solicitors, secured the £80,000 settlement, avoiding the need for the matter to go to court.
He said: “This was a case of miscommunication and also failure to ensure follow-up examinations were carried out. It is something we see too often, where a specialist records the need to review a patient by a certain timeframe to check for serious conditions, but then it simply doesn’t happen.
"It can be avoided by following clear processes. In this case there was a clear communications breakdown between the hospital, the GP Practice and the care home, and that meant critical details about medication were lost and continuity of care was poor.
“Patients should not be expected to chase up follow-up appointments and be asking why appointments and examinations have not been confirmed. In this case our client was focussed on his rehabilitation and getting back to his own home as soon as possible.”
Mr Gascoyne believes the issue is symptomatic of a wider problem with tracking appointments.
He said: “Given the number of cases we see where follow-up appointments fall off the radar, it is certainly something we would advise people to be aware of. Don’t wait for the letter or call that never comes if you have been told at some stage that you need seeing and reviewing again.
“In this case, had the follow-up appointment been arranged within four to six months, the Trust would have noted the need to have been treating our client with eye drops to manage his glaucoma symptoms between February 2018 and February 2019. This would have prevented the significant deterioration in sight in his right eye.”
A spokesperson for Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust says: “The Trust would like to apologise once again for the care this patient received. We have learned lessons as a result of this case. We are pleased that the case has now been settled and would like to pass on our sincere best wishes to the claimant.”
