Upheld complaints

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient stating her child attended the Emergency Department (ED) with an ankle injury and was diagnosed with a sprain. Ten days later patients’ mother received a letter stating a fracture had been found.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The complaint was shared with the Doctor concerned who apologises and will receive further training.

A complaint was received from a patient reporting issues with the Mirena coil. Patient was advised to wait 3 months until she was seen in clinic, patient had to seek medical assistant from GP.  Patient unhappy with the Gynaecology team advice to wait.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. A process has been implemented within the Gynaecology department to support patients experiencing complications or needing advice.

A complaint was received from a patient complaining about the Urology administrative process for admission and the need to chase biopsy results and why the patient’s results were not shown on the MyCare App.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that it needs to be made clearer to patients that not all appointments are currently visible in the MyCare patient portal.

A complaint was received from a patient stating that she was advised to attend the Emergency Department (ED) at that she was given her medication intravenously rather than orally.  Which lead to the patient having an allergic reaction where the patient was left in the toilet on their own. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged the error in the way the medication was administered. They advised that the allergic reaction would have occurred regardless of whether the medication was given orally or intravenously. The complaint was shared with the nurse involved, who has apologised, provided a written account, and will use this experience for professional development.

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient who was unhappy with her husband’s stay on an inpatient ward. The patient, flagged as high risk for falls, experienced a fall during his stay. Additionally, the patient’s wife was unsure if he received his medication, and he was discharged home in his pyjamas.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that this was not the standard of care that the Trust aims to deliver. Due to the patient’s confused state and attempts to get out of bed, he was put under observation. When he tried to mobilise himself, he fell, but his fall was guided by a staff member to ensure he did not hit his head.

The wife was reassured that her husband’s regular medication was administered appropriately, although one medication was not given to the patient on the day of his procedure. The complaint has been shared with staff for learning

A patient complained that they were initially informed their biopsies were all clear. However, they were later told that one of the samples was degraded and not fully analysed, leading to confusion about whether another procedure was necessary.

The Trust apologised for poor communication around biopsy results. Explanation provided regarding degraded sample and reassurance regarding need for repeat procedure

A complaint was received from a member of the public regarding breaches of confidentiality in an outpatient area and observed staff leaving their smartcards in unsupervised computers.

The Trust acknowledged the breaches in patient confidentiality and explained the actions taken to address the concerns raised. The Trust thanked the complainant for highlighting these important matters.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient who attended the Emergency Department (ED) with a urological complication and was unhappy with the long wait to be seen. The patient was then referred for an outpatient appointment for a cystoscopy, which had to be stopped due to medical reasons. Additionally, the patient received two hospital letters in one envelope, one of which was intended for another patient.

The Trust apologised for the long wait in the ED and explained the reasons why the cystoscopy had to stop. The Consultant met with the patient’s family, and a surgical procedure was arranged. The Trust thanked the patient’s family for bringing to their attention the breach of confidentiality, which was investigated separately from the complaint.

A complaint was received from the parents of a patient who were unhappy with the attitude of the doctor who saw their child. The parents were concerned about the contradictory advice regarding the medication, as they were told one thing by NHS 111 and another by the ED doctor. They also raised concerns about the lack of empathy shown towards their child’s medical condition

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. The Trust confirmed that their advice regarding the medication was correct based on the Doctors examination of the patient. The complaint was shared with the doctor concerned, who apologised and has reflected on the incident.

A complaint was received from a patient who stated that their partner had been privately messaged by a staff member regarding the patient’s medical condition, thereby breaching confidentiality

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and confirmed that a breach had been found. The patient was reassured that the Trust had taken immediate action by removing the staff member’s access to all systems. The Trust’s HR department is now conducting a separate investigation into the breach of confidentiality.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding poor communication with the Cardiology Department secretaries. The patient was attempting to follow up on an overdue MRI scan appointment and eventually sought assistance from the Patient Advice & Liaison Service (PALS) team, feeling lost in the system.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, confirming that an extension’s voicemail was not being monitored due to staff changes. A new procedure has been implemented to ensure that voicemails are checked regularly. The department arranged for the patient’s MRI to be conducted urgently and for the results to be reported in time for the patient’s outpatient appointment.

A complaint was received from a patient who had been given a diagnosis without the support of a friend or relative and felt overwhelmed by the amount of information provided and lack of support from the doctor.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The Consultant has reflected on the patient’s appointment and recognises that further support should have been given to the patient and apologises for this.   

A complaint was received from the patient’s mother who questioned a mark on the patients head indicating the mark was a bruise when it was a birth mark that hadn’t been recorded on the patient’s medical notes.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and for not documenting the birthmark in the patient’s notes. Consequently, the midwife correctly referred the patient to the Royal Surrey to be seen by a paediatrician, in accordance with the Surrey Safeguarding Children’s Partnership policy. The complaint has been shared with the midwife, who has reflected on the incident and will change her practice in the future

A complaint was received from the mother of the patient regarding the lack of emergency ENT care and treatment offered to her child. Despite the request of the patient’s GP the ENT Senior House Officer (SHO) declined to admit the patient.  The patient was seen at another Trust and administered IV antibiotics.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and recognised the patient should have been admitted. The team have shared the incident anonymously with the wider team and the member of staff has been made aware to enable him to reflect on the matter.  The clinical team have been reminded that in the case of a GP referral a discussion should be held with a more senior clinician. 

A complaint was received by a patient complaining about the lack of care and communication she experienced undergoing a procedure in Urology

The Trust apologised for the distress caused.  Reception staff have been asked to inform patients when clinic appointments are running behind and/or delays. 

A complaint was received from the Granddaughter of a patient complaining about the lack of communication on how to disconnect a pacemaker when the patient was on end of life care.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused. The Trust outlined the process to disconnect the pacemaker and recognised learning from the complaint. 

A complaint was received from a patient about post op mobility issues were not discussed and addressed prior to pre-op and by the Consultant. 

The Trust apologised that insufficient consideration given to post-operation needs of the patient due to them being a wheelchair user.  Errors were acknowledge in the pre-op process and changes would be implemented. 

A complaint was received regarding the attitude of a Gynaecology Consultant who the patient encountered in the Emergency Department (ED).

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The complaint was shared with the Consultant concerned who apologises and has reflected on the incident.  The Trust agree to transfer the patients care to a different Consultant.

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about their visit to the Emergency Department (ED).  The patient states there was poor communication and delays for results, medication and discharge.  

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  It was concluded the delays were due to human error and poor communication.  The complaint has been shared with staff for learning.

A complaint was received regarding the attitude, lack of understanding and empathy of an Oncology Doctor. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The complaint was shared with the Doctor concerned who apologises and has reflected on the incident.

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with the delays in the Emergency Department (ED).  The patient’s injuries required urgent surgery and a stay in intensive care. 

The Trust apologised for the delay in being seen by a doctor; provision of pain relief and performance of scans.  The patient was provided reassurance regarding their surgical procedure. 

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient who was unhappy with the delays in the Emergency Department (ED).  Due to the delays for imaging the patient’s appendix burst and they required surgery.  Patient was admitted to a ward, where a Health Care Assistant (HCA) mistakenly confused the patient with another, and raised concerns over medication ward administration and security.

The Trust apologised for the mother & patient’s experience.  The complaint has highlight several areas of learning that has been shared with the ward team.  The HCA has been provided with further training to ensure patient details are checked at all times. The mother was reassured the patient received appropriate and timely medication. 

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with the lack of communication, cancelled outpatient appointments and care they were receiving from Cardiology. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The Trust agree to transfer the patients care to a different Consultant. 

A complaint was received from a patient who attended the Emergency Department (ED) patient was unhappy with the delays in getting their test results.  Patient was given a diagnosis and on discharge patient went home; their condition worsened and they went to another ED where they provided a different diagnosis which caused unnecessary distress to the patient. 

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The complaint highlighted poor communication between ED and the Pathology team and new process has been implemented.   The complaint also highlighted poor communication with the patient which has been feedback to staff in the ED for learning.

A complaint has been received from patient who attended the Emergency Department (ED) after a road traffic collision.  Patient unhappy with delays in getting medication, scans, tests and was told to sit rather than lie flat and assistance with personal hygiene

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The complaint has been shared with the team for learning. 

A complaint has been received from the daughter of a patient who is unhappy that the patient’s medication was stopped in error and the patient’s condition deteriorated until the error was spotted.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and acknowledged that the patient’s medication had been stopped in error and should have been prescribed daily.  The Trust outlined measures implemented to prevent a similar incident

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with the lack of care under Trauma & Orthopaedics (T&O).  Patient complains that multiple appointments were cancelled or rescheduled.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The department outlined measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence. 

A complaint was received from a parent of a child who was prescribed the wrong dosage of medication

The Trust apologised for the distress caused by error assured the complainant there would be no long lasting impact on the patient.

A complaint was received from a parent of a patient who attended the Emergency Department raising a concern glass was not removed from the patients head and hand. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The ED department have discussed this matter during their safety huddles, emphasizing the importance of conducting thorough secondary surveys. 

A complaint was received from a patient who waited six months for their echocardiogram results.  When the results were reported they were sent to the wrong clinician

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and conducted a review of their processes, to ensure results are reported in a timely manner and accurately sent to the appropriate clinician. 

A complaint was received from a patient’s husband regarding the attitude and behaviour of a staff member in the Emergency Department (ED).

The Trust apologised for the behaviour of the staff member and for any distressed caused.  The staff member has been spoken to and receiving further training.

A complaint was received from a patient’s wife due to the prolonged wait times in the Emergency Department (ED), the lack of nursing care, medication delays, and insufficient assistance with feeding and lack of consideration despite the patient cancer diagnosis.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The ED department have discussed this matter during their safety huddles.  Clinical staff have been reminded to assess patients’ needs.

A complaint was received from a parent of a patient who attended the Emergency Department (ED) on two occasions with chest pain and vomiting.  Patient discharged without medication.  The patient then required a surgical procedure that was cancelled.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and missed diagnosis on the second visit to the Emergency Department (ED).  Although the patient was being monitored by the surgical team the procedure was cancelled due to an emergency admission requiring priority. 

A complaint was received from a patient who had attended the Emergency Department (ED) following a fall; patient was told the CT scan had no abnormalities and was discharged; patient was contacted and asked to re-attend the Emergency Department (ED) later due to an abnormality being found. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and missed diagnosis.  Due to the patient initially attending the Emergency Department (ED) out of hours the CT Scan was reported on by a Third Party.  It was explained it was a perceptual error due to the size of the abnormality and it was identified as part of routine quality assurance processes.

 

A complaint has been received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a staff member in the Radiology department. 

The Trust apologised for the behaviour of the staff member and for any distressed caused.  The staff member has been spoken to and receiving further training.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient who had been an inpatient.  On discharge the patient’s mother found two addition medications that where not for the patient. 

The Trust apologised for the distress caused by error.  The Trust carried out a medication incident investigation which highlighted an error by staff.  The complaint has been discussed anonymously in staff safety huddles and actions have been implemented to prevent a repeat incident.

A complaint was received from the partner of a patient. The patient attended an outpatient appointment MRI scan in 2022.  Despite chasing for the scan results neither the complainant, patient nor GP were informed of the results.  Patient became aware that the results indicated a stroke and trapped nerve in the neck.  The patient suffered a further stroke in October 2023

The Trust apologised for the distress caused by the error.  The Trust advised at the time of the MRI scan we were moving from paper records to electronic records.  The referral for the MRI had been completed incorrectly causing the results not to be sent to the referring clinician.  The case was reviewed at the Trust Executive Safety Meeting and the outcome shared with the complainant and patient.

A complaint was received from a patient who had an orthopaedic surgical procedure.  The patient complained that the clinician had not explained the extent of their injury; there were concerns about the wound, the inconvenience of wearing a leg brace and the discharge document was incorrect.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience, the patient was seen in clinic to discuss the injury and the wound was checked.  The patients discharge document was reviewed and amended. 

A complaint was received from a patient who attended the Emergency Department; the patient raised a concern that she had taken pain medication prior to attending the department; whilst waiting the patient was offered further medication that could have caused an overdose.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The complaint has been shared with the clinical teams in the department and discussed at their medication safety briefings.  

A complaint was received from a patient who had a MRI following a stroke; the patient had chased for the results multiply times without success.  The patient was given a clinician’s name, on speaking to the clinician it was identified the clinician was not involved in the patients care.  The clinician agreed to review the scan and write to the patients GP.  The patient complained that they were still waiting for their results.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  A new process has been introduced making sure clinician’s receive notifications when results are ready to review.  The complaint has been shared with the clinician who has reviewed the complaint and reflected.

A complaint has been received from a relative regarding the attitude and behaviour of a staff member when they attended the Trust following the death of their relative. 

The Trust apologised for the behaviour of the staff member and for any distressed caused to the complainant and their family.  The staff member has been spoken to and receiving further training.

A complaint was received from a patient who had tested positive for MRSA two months prior to their planned surgical procedure.  Patient was only informed they tested positive on the day of surgery. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The Pre Op team have reviewed their processes and introduced and new notification system make sure patients will be notified prior to the surgical date.

A complaint has been received from a patient concerned that the Consultant wrote to her GP informing them that she had made a complaint about her hospital treatment. The patient was also concerned about the terminology used in the letter.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused by the concerns raised by the complainant and acknowledged that this was a breach of confidentiality. The Trust also acknowledges that the wording used was inappropriate and apologised for this.

 

A complaint has been received from a patient who was concerned how her wound was sutured in maternity, how a nurse interrupted her baby’s first feed to administer injections. Patient was also concerned that she had not been given breastfeeding advice/training.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and that certain areas of her care were not explained to her.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient who was unhappy with the care received in ENT and with the attitude of the Consultant.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The Consultant concerned sincerely apologised for their attitude and reflected on the feedback provided.  

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient raising concerns the patient had been moved three times whilst an inpatient, communication was poor and clinicians failed to include family in the patient’s treatment as she suffered with dementia. Patient booked for pacemaker and family were unaware of this.

The Trust apologised that the patient's family were not updated in a timely manner regarding her heart condition and proposed treatment. The Trust also apologised that assumptions were made that the ward would have updated the family and for not checking that the patient had a family member in the UK with power of attorney.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient who had been involved in a road traffic collision.  On arrival, the patient complained of neck pain but was left sitting in an upright position without a neck collar. Patient was unhappy with the lack of information, care and helpfulness of the receptionist and self-discharged.  The next day the patient spoke to their GP and had a scan at another hospital, which confirmed a fracture.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The Trust have informed the patient that they will be using their complaint as a case study during teaching seminars with staff to make them aware of situations like this don’t happen again.

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient raising concerns that when the patient had a fall in his nursing home and attended the Emergency Department unable to weight bear; he was discharged without having an x-rayed. On returning to the hospital for a different appointment it was identified the patient had a hip fracture and required surgery.

The Trust apologised for the physical, psychological and emotional suffering the patient and family have suffered.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient who had difficulties in receiving an appointment for the Cardiology department.  The patient was seen in clinic, the patient was advised they would receive a call the following week with an update about their treatment & care plan.  The telephone call did not take place; on trying to contact the Clinician, the patient tried the department numerous times without getting through.  Eventually the patient spoke to a staff member who advised the patient their records had not been updated and the Clinician was on annual leave. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and distress caused.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the cancellation of his Trauma & Orthopaedics appointment.  The patient stated they were not informed of the cancellation resulting in much inconvenience and unnecessary expense.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and distress caused.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient’s unofficial carer.  The carer raised concerns when the patient attended the Emergency Department, the patients Care Passport was not followed. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  The Emergency Department have implemented learnings from the patient’s experience.

The Trust received a complaint from the patient’s daughter who was unhappy with the care and treatment the patient received in the Emergency Department.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience; the Doctor who was treating the patient gave an apology for the poor care that they received during their stay.

The Trust received a complaint from the patient’s mother about her baby developing blood stools following a vaccination.  Mother and baby attended the Emergency Department and were sent home; after a further admittance, diagnostic tests took place and the patient was diagnosed with E Coli.

The Trust apologised for the families experience; the delay in diagnosis & treatment.

The Trust received a complaint from the patient following surgery at Frimley who was referred back to RSCH for post-surgery monitoring.  Due to RSCH not being aware of referral letters from Frimley this lead to a delay in scan results and adversely affected the treatment options available to the patient.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused by concerns and recognised inconsistencies in the referral process from Frimley Park to the Royal Surrey

A complaint was received from the patient regarding three cardiology appointments that were rearranged by the Trust. The patient also complains the appointment centre & cardiology department did not answer the telephone or responds to messages

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the Trust's communication with the patient could have be improved.  The patients appointments were cancelled due to a clinician leaving the Trust and regrettably had to be rescheduled.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a deceased patient’s daughter; the daughter stated that her father had been buried and the Trust contacted her asking to arrange for her funeral directors to collect her late father from the Trust Mortuary.   

The Trust apologised to the family for their experience.  It was concluded the incident was a result of human error, the complaint has been shared with the team and a new process has been implemented.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delay in care and treatment by the Trauma & Orthopaedic (T&O) team.  Concerns raised that appointments were rescheduled on several occasions and the patient had been waiting for over a year for their initial T&O appointment.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained as a result of the  Covid-19 pandemic there had been a significant backlog of patients waiting to be seen. 

 

The Trust received a complaint from the sister of a patient regarding the care and treatment that the patient received in the Emergency Department (ED) when he was having a mental health crisis.  Concerns raised the patients had been in ED for 5 days due to no mental health beds available in the country. The patient waited 25 hours to be assessed by the Mental Health Team and was not advised about showering facilities and process for obtaining food and drink. 

The Trust apologised for the patient experience and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  The complaint has been shared with the clinical and catering teams.

 

The Trust received a complaint by the daughter of a deceased patient in relation to a phone call made by a Medical Examiners Office

The Trust apologised for the daughter’s experience.  It was concluded the incident was a result of human error, the complaint has been shared with the team and a new process has been implemented.

 

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her cancelled T&O appointment and  she was not informed of this resulting in an unnecessary trip to the Trust.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The Trust explained that there error occurred when the Trust was upgrading to a new electronic patient system. The patient’s appointment had not migrated across.  The error was referred to the Trusts Digital Team to investigate.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient about her care and treatment in the early stages of her pregnancy to the mid-point where she miscarried.

The Trust offered their condolences to the patient and apologised for her experience. The Trust reassured the patient we have reviewed our postnatal appointments after distressing events making sure patients are supported by a midwife or maternity support worker.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the manager of a care home regarding one of their residents. The resident had surgery at the Trust for a fractured elbow and should have been followed up 2 weeks post-operatively. The follow up was only completed 4 weeks post-operatively and at that stage the patient was found to have a Stage 4 pressure sore to her elbow and exposed metal work.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of communication with Urology since his prostate cancer surgical procedure.  Concerns raised that there has been lack of follow up appointments checking his PSA levels which have now increased.  

Trust apologises for delay in outpatient appointment being provided. Trust has confirmed patient's current treatment plan is suitable and has apologised for the delay in being able to provide the appropriate imaging.

Trust has reassured patient that delay in treatment would not have caused any issues going forward.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding his wife's appointment at the Trust. Concern raised over the attitude and behaviour of a Doctor and the care and treatment provided during the consultation.

The Trust apologised for the patient and her husband’s experience.  The complaint was shared with the Doctor concerned who apologises for their behaviour, the Doctor has met with the Clinical Director in Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Medical Director to review and reflect on the incident. 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a consultant during an outpatient appointment. Concern raised that the consultant was rude and unprofessional

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and the complaint was shared with the Consultant concerned for reflection and learning. Reassurance was given that the complaint had also been shared with the Trust's Medical Director and that the Consultant concerned would be writing a professional reflection.

The Trust received a complaint from the patient’s daughter due to the lack of parking spaces in the St Lukes Car Park and comments made in a response sent to her via PALS

Trust apologised for the difficulties in finding a car parking space but reassured the daughter that the Trust had recently implemented a new car parking management plan and a new staff multi story car park was due to open May 2023.   The complaint was shared with the staff member who responded to the PALS enquiry and apologised for the distressed causes, a new process has been implemented to check responses for PALS enquires.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the information added to her patient record by a Cardiology consultant. Concern raised that his comments were unprofessional and insensitive particularly given her father had recently/suddenly died from a MI.

Trust apologised for patients experience reassurance offered that this had been discussed with doctor concerned and his clinical supervisor, as well as the Medical Director.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient chasing his cardiology results.  The Patient had previously contacted PALs and was told his consultant would receive a clinic letter in Oct. 22.  Patient and his GP didn’t receive the clinic letter.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and confirmed that his test results had now been sent both to him directly and to his GP. The Trust acknowledged that the delay was longer than expected and confirmed that the patient's correspondence had prompted a review of the administration processes within the department.

The Trust received a complaint from the Lead Support Worker of a patient with learning disabilities re the cancellation of several neurology appointments, the length of wait for appointments and transport delays. The patient feels that he has been discriminated against because of his learning disabilities.

Trust apologises for the patients experience and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver.  A review has taken place of the patient’s records and it was identified an alert hadn’t been added to alert staff of the patients learning difficulties.

The Trust received a complaint from the son of a patient regarding the delays his mother experienced in the completion of her DVLA paperwork by the Cardiology Department. Also re how this concern was originally handled as a PALS query rather than a formal complaint.

The Trust apologised for the patients experience explaining there were staff shortages in the Cardiology department and the Clinician involved in the patients care was a locum who had left the Trust.  It was explained that the patient had already raised a PALS enquiry and it was deemed the appropriate way to reach the desired outcome.  The patients son was reassured when a PALS enquiry or Formal Complaint is raised it will be sent to the senior management team.  It is then their responsibility to analyse any trends arising and implement any learning.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding an unnecessary second telephone appointment with the Urology team and the delay to have a procedure.  A further concern was raised about the difficulties in emailing PALS, not being able to see a PALS officer and the PALS leaflet contained the incorrect information about the PALS office location.

The Trust apologised to the patient for sending a letter offering a second telephone appointment as this was an error.  It was explained as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic there had been a significant backlog of patients waiting for non-cancerous procedures.    The Trust apologised to the patient for having difficulties in communicating with the PALS team; the team had temporarily moved as their office was needed for clinical space.  The team had been allocated a new office and would be moving in June 2023 when the PALS leaflet will be revised.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient’s daughter raising concerns over the care her father received whilst at Haslemere Hospital and Compton Ward. Concerns raised in regards to bedsores that she felt staff ignored.

The Trust apologies to the daughter regarding the poor updates she received regarding her father’s care. 

A complaint received from the daughter of a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a member of the Echocardiogram Team. Concern that she was aggressive and unapologetic towards her mother when there was confusion over appointment times.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the confusion over appointment times was as a result of human error within the Administration Team. The Trust offered reassurance that training had now been provided for the Administrator regarding appointment scheduling, the complaint had been discussed directly with staff member regarding her manner and shared anonymously within the wider team for learning.

A complaint was received from a patient that they were not seen by ENT in the Emergency Department (ED).  Patient was asked to leave the department if they could treat their symptoms at home.  Patient believes the ENT team were waiting for ED to call them to advise patient was ready to be seen.

The Trust apologised for the patient experience; the patient should have been advised to remain in the waiting room when there was an announcement made by senior nurse that wait times would be in excess of 6 hours. 

A complaint was received from a patient's wife regarding the care and treatment given to her husband by the Respiratory Medicine Team and Cardiology. Concern raised re poor communication and that the patient's urgent referral was downgraded without explanation.

The Trust explained that there is no record in the patient's medical records to indicate that he had experienced a TIA or missed CVA. The Trust apologised for the lack of communication regarding the patient's follow up appointment with the Respiratory Department and regretted that, due to the size of the waiting list, no timescale can currently be provided for this. The Trust apologised for the difficulties the patient has experienced in following up his GP's referral to the RACPC (Rapid Access Chest Pain Clinic). The Trust recognised that the patient's referral had been incorrectly triaged and, once this error had been noted, the patient's referral was upgraded and he was offered an earlier appointment with a Consultant Cardiologist.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her baby received in the Emergency Department (ED). Concerns raised regarding comments made by the doctor who saw her baby and queries regarding swab testing.

The Trust apologised for the complainant's experience in the ED with her baby. The Trust explained that the learning from her correspondence would be shared with the ED Doctor for reflection and learning. The Trust confirmed that testing for RSV infection is not routinely carried out in the ED and apologised that this was not explained at the time.

A complaint was received from a patient who raises concerns in the delays receiving her histology results

The Trust apologised for the patients experience; due to the delays in histopathology reporting this is due to the services expanding in October 2022; the service is experiencing acute staff shortages.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the incorrect information she was provided in the Gynaecology Department. The patient has requested to see a different Consultant.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  Patient care was transferred to another Consultant

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her experience under the care of the Breast Surgery Team. Concerns raised regarding unprofessional behaviour and poor communication.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the Trust's communication with her could have been improved. The Consultant concerned sincerely apologised for his attitude and behaviour, advised that he had reflected deeply on the feedback provided and that he would include this reflection as part of his annual appraisal.

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband received in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern raised that an infection was missed, the patient did not have an examination despite a lengthy wait and that his test results were shared in Costa Coffee Café.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the care and treatment provided did not reflect the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. The Trust's response indicated that learning had been taken from this complaint and that the doctor concerned will be asked to reflect on how the care and treatment he provided at the time could have been improved.

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about their care & treatment in the Emergency Department (ED). 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience in the ED and acknowledged that the level of service provided on this occasion fell below expectations. The Trust outlined measures being undertaken to improve the streaming service and to ensure that delays in patients receiving pain relief are minimised. The Trust explained that the location of the streaming room is being changed to eliminate the need for patients to move around within the department.

A complaint was received from the father of a patient with concern that his daughter's hand injury was not appropriately treated in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern that she subsequently required urgent plastic surgery and her severed artery could not be repaired.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained the rationale for the care and treatment provided. The Trust recognised that there was learning to be taken from the concerns raised regarding the referral process and confirmed that the ED had already implemented measures to address this.

A complaint was received from the son of a patient regarding a clinic letter his mother received from the Gastroenterology Department. Concern that this letter is inaccurate and he had difficulty contacting a Medical Secretary via telephone.

The Trust offered condolences to the complainant following the death of his mother, the patient. The Trust apologised for the distress caused by the wording of a letter and explained that the doctor concerned no longer works at the Trust. The Trust apologised for the difficulties the complainant has experienced in contacting the Gastroenterology Team and offered reassurance that a robust Administrative Support Team is now in place to support clinicians.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding her father's high flow oxygen machine becoming unplugged during his admission. Concern that the appropriate protocols were not adhered to following this and it was not documented in his medical records.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The Trust acknowledged that the patient's oxygen had become disconnected when he was re-positioned and explained that the importance of checking machines has been re-iterated to the Nursing Team. The Trust also apologised that these matters were not recorded in the patient's nursing records and that a HCA left the patient unattended when she went to get help rather than using the emergency call bell. Reassurance was provided that additional training has been given to the HCA and that the Ward Manager has been made aware of the shortcomings re documentation in order to improve future patient care.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding attitude and behaviour of a Consultant in the Emergency Department (ED).

Trust apologised for the patient experience in the Emergency Department. The Consultant concerned sincerely apologised for his attitude and behaviour, advised that he had reflected deeply on the feedback provided and that he would include this reflection as part of his annual appraisal.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Consultant in the Gynaecology Department. The patient felt that the doctor was abrupt and made her fell unimportant.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and the complaint was shared with the Consultant concerned for reflection and learning. Reassurance was given that the complaint had also been shared with the Trust's Medical Director and that the Consultant concerned would be writing a professional reflection.

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about the care and treatment they received in the Emergency Department (ED).  Patient also raised concerns about a gynaecological procedure. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the care given in the ED was not satisfactory. The ED Nursing Team have reflected on the concerns raised to improve future patient care and are currently undertaking a transformation project to support this.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the advice they were given about managing their diabetics prior to having a procedure. Concerns were raised the advice was incorrect and resulted in patients procedure being cancelled.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and offered reassurance that he had been given the correct information regarding the management of his diabetes prior to a procedure. The Trust acknowledged that whilst the patient was given written instructions, clearer information could have been provided which would have avoided the need for his procedure to be cancelled on the day. The Trust explained that the learning from his complaint has been shared with the Pre-Assessment Nursing staff to avoid similar situations occurring in future.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulties getting a completed DVLA form completed by the Cardiology Department.  Concerns raised about the length of time taken and the poor communication from the Cardiology Department.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience.  The Trust offered reassurance that the current process is being reviewed to avoid similar situations in future

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care, treatment and advice he was given by the Urology Department. Concern raised that patient’s care was compromised as another patient's notes had been filed incorrectly in the patients’ medical records. Patient complained that his colonoscopy was cancelled at short notice and after he had already taken preparatory medication due to the incorrect advice, he had been given.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and offered reassurance that the incorrect patient information had been removed from their medical records. The Trust confirmed that the Administration Teams would be reminded of the importance of being vigilant when filing patient notes. Trust explained the rationale for cancelling his procedure and acknowledged that the communication between teams could be improved.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his radiology appointment at Cranleigh Village Hospital. Concerns raised regarding the conflicting information given to patient prior to the scan with regards to fluids and the manner in which the Radiographer spoke with him.

The Trust apologised for the conflicting information provided prior to the patient's scan and for the manner in which the staff member conducting the scan spoke to patient. The Radiographer apologised for the distress caused to the patient.  The Radiographer would be writing a professional reflection and will undertake a reflective discussion in order to improve future patient care.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulties the patient encountered trying to update their personal details with the Audiology Department. Concerns also raised regarding a cardiology prescription, follow up appointments and staff attitudes.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged the difficulties he had in updating his information in the Audiology Department. The Trust offered reassurance that the correct information was now held for the patient. The Trust apologised for the errors made in the Cardiology Department and for the Doctor's attitude during his appointment. The Trust explained that the Doctor concerned had left the Trust and offered reassurance that the errors made had now been rectified.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the mismanagement received in relation to funding for fertility treatment. Patient raised concerns that it was only after cancer treatment had commenced he was told his fertility treatment would not be fully funded. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that he had been misinformed regarding the funding for his fertility treatment. The Trust recognised the impact this has had on the complainant and offered assistance in completing an application for funding. The Trust explained that patient information leaflets have been amended and staff will be offered training to ensure that patients receive clear and concise information regarding the funding of fertility treatment for cancer patients.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the medication her mother was prescribed prior to her death. Concern raised that blood thinning medication was prescribed, however not given and the patient subsequently suffered bilateral pulmonary embolisms

The Trust apologised for the omission of the patient's blood thinning medication and explained that this case had been discussed at the Executive Safety Meeting. The Trust outlined the measures taken to avoid similar situations in future, which included Trust-wide communications as an internal safety alert, a standardised medication chart and written reflections from the Nursing Team re their responsibilities re the administration of medications.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the decision to remove her from the waiting list for a hysterectomy. Concern that she was subsequently seen privately and this procedure was promptly undertaken.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged several shortcomings in her care and treatment. The Trust explained how the patient had been inappropriately removed from the waiting list for surgery and outlined the measures undertaken to prevent similar situations reoccurring in future. The Trust advised that functionality in the new patient electronic records system will provide a clear audit trail and that if a patient is removed from a waiting list, a letter will be generated and sent to ensure patients understand the rationale for their removal.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the maternity care and treatment that she received from the Trust. Concern raised that she was not examined thoroughly despite presenting with symptoms and following advice from the Pregnancy Advice Line.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the patient's observations should have been taken and her baby should have been monitored during her attendance. The Trust also recognised that a speculum examination could have been undertaken. Feedback has been given to the Midwife and Doctor concerned for their reflection and learning.

A complaint was received from the manager of a nursing home regarding the self-discharge of a patient from the ED during the night. Concern raised that the discharge was unsafe as the patient lacked capacity and that a discharge summary was not provided.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that it would have been appropriate for the ED Team to ascertain the patient's capacity with the nursing home staff before allowing him to self-discharge. The Trust apologised that the ED Team did not contact the nursing home to advise that the patient had left the Trust. The Trust explained that the patient's discharge information had been sent directly to his GP. The Doctor concerned is to reflect on the concerns raised in his annual appraisal and he will update his learning related to Adult Safeguarding to improve his future patient care. The Doctor will also consider his communication skills when speaking with carers and ensure a safe discharge is planned and fully communicated with the Nursing Team.

A complaint was received from the son of a patient regarding his mother's experience in the Emergency Department (ED). Concerns raised in relation to the length of time taken to site a cannula, lack of fluids provided and difficulties with the booking in process.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained how the delays had occurred during her ED attendance. The Trust acknowledged that the standard of care provided on this occasion could have been improved. The Trust outlined the measures being undertaken in the ED to improve the process for expected patients in future and these measures included prompt communication between teams, patients to be redirected in a timely manner and a trial with a Clinical Navigator to oversee patients' pathways.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding an injury she sustained on the Trust's premises. Concern raised that a member of staff lost control of a wheelchair outside the entrance, which hit the patient, causing an injury, which required sutures.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and offered reassurance that a thorough investigation had been undertaken. The Trust explained the discussions that have been held with the Portering Team and considered actions to prevent similar situations re-occurring, such as the use of safety netting.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the manner in which a member of staff spoke with her over the telephone.

The Trust apologised for the complainant's experience and explained that the complaint has been shared with the staff member concerned for their individual learning and reflection.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the loss of her late mother's rings. Concern raised that the rings cannot be found or accounted for, and ideally, the complainant would like them to be found and buried with her mother.

The Trust apologised to the complainant that unfortunately, her mother's rings could not be found and reassurance was given that this had been shared with the ward team and more robust documentation processes will be implemented going forward.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Midwife. The patient felt that she was treated unfavourably due to her race and culture.

The Trust apologised for the upset caused to the patient and explained that it was certainly not the intention of the Midwife to cause such distress. Reassurance was given that she had taken the time to reflect on these matters and that her temporary agency contract with the Trust would cease.

A complaint was received from the son of a patient regarding the delay in his father's CT scan being reported. Concern that this lead to his tumour growing in size with no surgical options available to him and he is now receiving palliative care.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that there had been delays in the reporting of his CT scan. The Trust outlined measures being undertaken to improve reporting timescales including the recruitment of additional Consultants, in-house training and an improved Radiology Computer System. The Trust explained that sadly the patient's tumour was deemed inoperable and that the delay in providing palliative treatments was unlikely to have had an impact on the patient's life expectancy.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding her father's outpatient appointments at the Trust. Concern raised that two appointments have been poorly planned and implemented. This has caused great inconvenience for the family and the patient is still waiting for his lumber puncture results.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and provided information regarding the patient's lumbar puncture results. The Trust explained that the delay in the patients' results being available was due to the introduction of the Trust's electronic patient administration system. The Trust offered reassurance that an incident report has been logged to ensure this matter is fully investigated to ensure similar situations do not occur.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the lack of communication following her son's emergency surgery. Concern raised that she was not contacted, despite being provided with a bleep, and that her son was left unaccompanied by a parent on the ward.

The Trust apologised for the complainant's experience and explained that she was not contacted after her son's surgery due to a miscommunication between staff. The Trust explained that the Recovery Nursing Team have been reminded that parents should always be bleeped once their child has arrived in the Recovery area. The Ward Nursing Team have also reflected on the concerns raised to improve their future patient care.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the epidural medication that she received during childbirth. Concern raised that two top-up doses had expired.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged the distress that had been caused to the patient. The Trust explained that the drug expiry date had not been checked and attributed the incident to human error. The Trust offered reassurance that the staff involved have demonstrated their learning from this incident. The Pharmacy Team have liaised with the drug manufacturer who confirmed that the integrity of the vial was 126 days and the drug itself would expire in November 2023. The Trust explained that this information was intended to reassure the complainant and that it did not remove any responsibility to ensure that medications given are in date.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experience in the Emergency Department (ED) and Ambulatory Emergency Care (AEC). The patient raised concern that her medical records had been confused with another patient, her call bell was not answered, delayed administration of pain relief and lack of paperwork provided.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that her correspondence had been shared with the ED and AEC Teams for reflection and learning. It was explained that the importance of answering call bell’s would be reiterated to staff at their departmental governance meeting and they would be reminded that discharge summaries should be sent out via post if they are not given to patient’s at the time of their discharge.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient raised concerns regarding lack of pain relief, triage processes, difficulty obtaining help from staff and queries in relation to her gynaecology procedure.

The Trust apologised and explained that the ED Nursing Team had reflected on the concerns raised to improve future patient care and are currently undertaking a transformation project to support this. Reassurance was given that since the patient’s visit, the ED had streamlined the triage process and uplifted their Clinical Matron cover to 7 days per week to challenge poor behaviour and to provide clinical oversight.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulty she had experienced obtaining an appointment for an echocardiogram in the Cardiology Department. The patient raised concern that, despite raising this matter via our Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS), an appointment was still not forthcoming.

The Trust apologised for the difficulties the patient had experienced and she was contacted by telephone with a date for her echocardiogram. The patient’s correspondence was shared with the Cardiology Team for reflection and learning.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her cancelled appointments in the Trauma and Orthopaedics (T&O) and Musculoskeletal (MSK) Departments. The patient advised that she had not been given explanations for these cancellations and she queried why she had not been prioritised for rebooking.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained that some patients appointments had unfortunately been cancelled (without staff knowledge) due to the Trust’s transition to our new electronic patient system. Reassurance was given to the patient that those affected would be prioritised for the rebooking of their appointments and the patient was advised that she was still within the 18 week referral for treatment timeframe for her condition.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a letter that she had received from the Musculoskeletal (MSK) Department stating that she had failed to attend her appointment, which she knew nothing about. The patient was concerned that this was now recorded in both hers and her GP’s records.

The Trust apologised to the patent and provided reassurance that a letter would be sent to her GP to acknowledge that she had not been made aware of this appointment and to apologise for the error. The MSK Service Manager spoke with the Appointments Centre Team regarding this shortcoming to ascertain how we can prevent such instances from reoccurring.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter-in-law of a patient regarding the care and treatment given in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern was raised regarding the delayed provision of Intravenous (IV) fluids and the complainant felt that this had negatively impacted the patient’s recovery.

The Trust apologised for the delay in providing IV fluids and explained that unfortunately, this was due to the department being short staffed at the time. Reassurance was given that the complaint would be shared anonymously at the department’s next governance meeting to ensure that staff could reflect and learn from the experience.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her cancelled outpatient appointment in the Gynaecology Department. The patient explained that she had not been made aware of the cancellation and that, despite her GP informing her that she would be seen within 2 weeks, her new appointment had been scheduled outside of this timeframe.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that her GP’s referral had been assessed by a clinician and downgraded to a routine appointment. The Trust acknowledged that the patient and her GP should have been made aware of this and the Outpatient Reception Team were spoken with and reminded of the importance of contacting the Assistant Specialty Manager to speak with patients directly regarding errors of this kind in the future.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulties he had encountered trying to update his contact details with the Audiology Department. Concerns also raised regarding a cardiology prescription, follow up appointments and staff attitudes.

Apologies were given for the patient’s experience and explained that unfortunately there was a 3-4 week delay in updating patient details and departmental training had been planned to improve this situation going forward. Reassurance was given that the patient’s details are now correct on our system and additionally, staff in the Cardiology Department were reminded of the importance of checking prescriptions for accuracy.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife received when she attended the Emergency Department (ED) suffering a miscarriage. Concern that the patient’s urine sample was lost, they were given news in front of other patients and staff were rude towards them.

 

Apologies were given for the patient and her husband’s experience and reassurance provided that their correspondence had been shared anonymously with the wider team for reflection and learning. It was explained that a new, private, dedicated space was being created for streaming and triaging as part of the departmental transformation project  and that Clinical Matron Cover had since been uplifted to 7 days per week for greater clinical oversight in the department.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a doctor in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient felt that the doctor was rude towards her and made derogatory comments about her and her injury.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained that this had been raised with the staff member concerned who expressed deep remorse for their behaviour. The patient was reassured that any HR action required as a result of the complaint would be undertaken as appropriate.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a consultant in the Neurology Department. The patient felt that the Consultant was angry that she had attended for a face-to-face appointment, and that he was both disrespectful and dismissive of her concerns.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and the complaint was shared with the Consultant concerned for reflection and learning. Reassurance was given that the complaint had also been shared with the Trust's Medical Director and that the Consultant concerned would be writing a professional reflection.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the medication that her mother was prescribed prior to her death. Concerns were raised that blood thinning medication was prescribed but not given and the patient subsequently suffered bilateral pulmonary embolisms.

The Trust apologised for the omission of the patient's blood thinning medication and explained that this case had been discussed at the Executive Patient Safety Meeting. The Trust outlined the measures taken to avoid similar situations in future which included Trust-wide communications as an internal safety alert, a standardised medication chart and written reflections from the Nursing Team regarding their responsibilities re the administration of medications.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her birthing experience. Concerns were raised that one of her twin babies experienced hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy during birth and that the Trust has not offered the expected follow up appointments to support her baby going forward.

The Trust acknowledged that the baby’s follow up appointment had not been booked within the specified timeframes however reassurance was given that a Consultant Paediatrician did not feel that this would be problematic. Each of the complainant's questions were addressed in turn and reassurance was given that all learning identified through the Serious Incident (SI) Root Cause Analysis (RCA) report had been shared throughout the Maternity Team.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the lack of notification that he had received regarding his rescheduled outpatient appointment. Concern that as a result, he has incurred unnecessary costs and spent time travelling that he did not need to.

The Trust apologised for the lack of notification that the patient received regarding his rescheduled appointment and provided reassurance that this had been discussed with the Booking Co-Ordinator Concerned and they were reminded of the importance of appropriate communication with patients in these circumstances.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding her husband's experience in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern raised that both she and the Police had been told he that her husband been discharged from the Trust when he had in fact been transferred to another hospital with a serious head injury.

The Trust apologised to the complainant for her experience and explained that going forward, the Reception Team will be advised to cross reference telephone numbers directly with our electronic patient system to avoid reoccurrence.

 

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment her son received following his knee surgery at the Trust. Concerns were raised over several aspects of the patient's care during his admission and that his discharge arrangements were inadequate.

The Trust apologised for the complainant and patient’s experience and acknowledged that the surgeon should have visited the patient post-operatively to discuss his surgery. Reassurance was given that the Practice Development Nurse had been working closely with Student Nurses on Hascombe Ward to encourage clear communication skills and it was explained that the patient’s GP would be appropriately made aware of his admission and surgery for continuity of care.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the granddaughter of a patient regarding a cancelled outpatient appointment. Concerns were raised that the patient was not informed of the cancelled appointment before she arrived at the Trust and this has caused her and the complainant much distress, inconvenience and expense.

The Trust apologised for the patient and complainant’s experience and for the understandable upset that this had caused. It was explained that a voicemail message had been left with the patient and a first class letter sent to her prior to her appointment and it was recognised that it was unfortunate that these had not been seen prior to their visit.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Midwife. Concerns were raised that the Midwife had made assumptions about the patient's English language speaking abilities and unnecessarily involved a Safeguarding Midwife and an interpreter during her admission.

The Trust apologised to the patient and reassured her that her concerns had been shared with the Midwife concerned. The Midwife took the time to reflect on these matters and conveyed her apologies for the understandable upset caused by her comments. Reassurance was given that the complaint would be shared anonymously with the Ward Team at their next impact to raise awareness of the impact that these matters have had.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the manager of a nursing home regarding the self-discharge of a patient from the Emergency Department (ED) during the night. Concerns were raised that the discharge was unsafe as the patient lacked capacity and also that a discharge summary had not been provided.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that it would have been appropriate for the ED Team to ascertain the patient's capacity with the nursing home staff before allowing him to self-discharge. Reassurance was given that the doctor concerned would reflect on these matters as part of their upcoming appraisal and it was explained that the patient’s discharge information had been sent directly to his GP.

 

The Trust received a complaint received from a patient, via his MP, regarding the waiting time for his hip replacement. Concern that when he met with his Consultant, he was advised that a number of surgical slots have been cancelled with no explanation.

The Trust explained why surgical slots had been cancelled and provided reassurance that the patient should have his surgery confirmed and planned within the next 3 months. A copy of the response was sent to the patient's MP.

 

A complaint was received from a visitor regarding the attitude and behaviour of the Car Parking Office Manager when she called to query her parking charges.

The Trust apologised for the visitor’s experience and acknowledged that she should not have been spoken to in this manner. The patient's wrongful parking charge was refunded and reassurance given that the member of staff in question had been reminded that their behaviour was unacceptable.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that he received from the Pain Management Service. Concerns were raised in relation to poor communication, difficulty in arranging appointments, lack of information prior to procedures and the attitude and behaviour of a doctor.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and that he had not received a follow up appointment and acknowledged the frustration this had caused. An appointment was booked for the patient with a different Consultant in a face-to-face format.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient with concern that a member of staff in the Emergency Department (ED) was discriminatory towards her.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and recognised that this had fallen short of both theirs and our expectations. Reassurance was given that the staff member concerned had been spoken with, to encourage reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the difficulties she had experienced in obtaining her MRI scan results and the impact this was having on her cancer care. Concerns were raised that despite raising this matter via our Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) it had not been possible to resolve this at an earlier stage.

The Trust explained that the patient's MRI scan findings were due to be shared with her during her outpatient appointment but unfortunately, this was not booked as it should have been. Reassurance was given that the Appointments Centre Team were working closely with the Diabetes and Endocrinology Department to understand and improve their bookings processes. The patient was given an appointment in clinic.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the correspondence that he had received from the Oncology Department. Concerns were raised that the letter contained another patient's clinical information and that, despite notifying the Department of the error, this had not been corrected or shared with the patient's GP.

Apologies were given for the error and reassurance given that the letter would be corrected and an amended copy sent through to the GP. Additionally, the response letter was CC'd to the GP to ensure that they were aware of the situation and the patient's recent experience.

 

The Trust received a complaint received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband had received under the care of the Cardiology Department. Concerns were raised that his diagnosis was missed during his admission and that this had led to his operation being delayed.

A response was provided to the complainant’s concerns by a Consultant Cardiologist, who offered to meet with both the complainant and the patient to discuss their concerns in a face-to-face setting. Reassurance was given that the patient’s experience would be discussed at the upcoming departmental governance meeting for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her maternity care and treatment. Concerns were raised regarding the competency of the Midwife as several processes undertaken required senior assistance and intervention.

The patient was reassured that the Midwife who cared for her was very experienced and that the particular intervention can be challenging for any Midwife. Apologies were given that the plan to augment labour with Oxytocin was not explained to the patient, her epidural did not provide her with the pain relief required and that she could feel her stitching being carried out. This had been discussed with the staff members concerned to encourage reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her discharge summary, which she felt was inaccurate. Concerns were raised that despite requesting amendments via the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS), this had not been done.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care that she had received after her emergency appendectomy. Concerns were raised that she was not provided with sufficient post-operative information and that the Nursing Team did not assist her when she left the Trust.

The Trust apologised for the lack of information provided to the patient prior to discharge regarding wound care. Reassurance was given that staff have been reminded as to where to obtain advice sheets, in order for these to be provided to patients going forward.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding an epidural that was given, despite her expressing that she did not wish to have one. The patient explained that this had caused her ongoing pain and discomfort.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained that the doctor concerned would reflect on these matters and on how he consents patient for anaesthesia in future. The Trust offered the patient the opportunity to meet with the Pain Management Team with regards to her ongoing pain and discomfort.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding her father's outpatient appointments at the Trust. Concerns were raised that two appointments had been poorly planned which caused inconvenience for the family and the patient is still waiting for his lumber puncture results.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and provided information regarding his lumbar puncture results. The Trust explained that the delay in the patients' results being available was due to the introduction of our new electronic patient administration system. The Trust offered reassurance that an incident report has been logged to ensure this matter is fully investigated to ensure similar situations do not occur.

The Trust received a complaint from the partner of a patient regarding his partner’s birthing experience at the Trust. Concern was raised regarding the care and treatment given, the management of her pain and the lack of follow up correspondence provided as agreed.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that the communication of information with the patient and her partner during labour could have been improved. A meeting was offered to the patient and her partner to meet with the Co-Clinical Director of Obstetrics and Gynaecology to discuss their concerns and future pregnancy care.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received from the Gynaecology Team. The patient raised concern that her post-operative complications were not appropriately investigated and she subsequently had to undergo surgery at another hospital.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that she should have been provided with antibiotics prior to discharge, which was fed back to the team for reflection and learning. The patient was reassured that in light of her complaint, the team would ensure that all patients that experience post-operative complications are given formal follow up appointments in clinic. The complaint was also shared anonymously at the Gynaecology Risk Meeting, where the Consultant Team were present.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her experience at the Trust when she attended an ultrasound scan appointment. The patient raised concern that she was marked as failing to arrive on time and concern was also raised regarding the attitude and behaviour of the Radiology Receptionist.

We apologised to the patient for the distress that she experienced and acknowledged that she did arrive on time for her appointment. The complaint was shared with the Receptionist concerned who was reminded of the importance of completing the appropriate identity checks when patients arrive into the department.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding her son’s appointment with the Paediatric Allergy Team. The complainant raised concern that the clinician’s subsequent letter contained inaccuracies and she felt that the Trust had not arranged the appropriate allergy testing for her son.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and acknowledged that there were inaccuracies in the letter, which was subsequently amended and a copy provided to the complainant and the patient’s GP. The department agreed to refer the patient for further testing.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the lack of communication her and her family received during her mother’s admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Concerns raised that the family were not made aware of their mother’s post-operative complications.

The Trust apologised for the family’s experience and acknowledged that this had fallen short of both theirs and our expectations. Reassurance was given that the Clinical Director of Anaesthetics will implement clear protocols to prevent such reoccurrences and all ICU Consultants had been contacted to disseminate the learning from the complaint.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding her mother’s discharge from the Trust. Concerns raised that a care package was not put in place and that she was not provided with the appropriate medications to take home.

The Trust apologised for the difficulties experienced by the family in supporting the patient following her discharge. The Trust explained that the Occupational Therapy Team were unaware that a care package had not been put in place to support the patient's husband, in recognition that she would not be able to care for him after her surgery. The Trust apologised that insufficient take home medication was provided and this was fed back to the team for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the incomplete information that she received from the Radiology Department prior to her herniogram.

The Trust apologised to the patient and explained that the Administrative Team within the Radiology Department had been reminded of the patient advice leaflet that is available for distribution for patient’s attending for herniograms.

 

A complaint was received from the granddaughter of a patient regarding a telephone call that her family received from the Trust advising that her grandfather was walking around the ward, despite the fact that they had previously been informed that he had passed away.

The Trust sincerely apologised for the upset caused to the family by this error and explained how this occurred. Reassurance was given that all Single Assessment Process (SAP) forms will now be kept within the patient’s main medical record to prevent such reoccurrences and their process will be overseen by the Nurse in Charge or the Staff Nurse responsible for accepting new admissions to the ward.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the 9 hour wait that he experienced in the Emergency Department (ED).

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that this had not offered him reassurance regarding our services. It was explained that due to the high number of patients in attendance at the time, staff were unable to see patients as quickly as they would have hoped to and this increase has been seen nationally. Reassurance was given that our teams continue to work hard to assess how patient flow through the hospital can be improved. 

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient who had recently been informed by a Consultant Respiratory Physician at the Trust that her chest x-ray from 2011 showed very concerning features that were not acted upon at the time.

The patient’s chest x-rays from 2011 and 2022 were reviewed and it was acknowledged that the same abnormalities could be seen on both. Apologies were given to the patient and it was explained that since 2011, practice has changed to ensure that all inpatient chest x-rays are routinely reported to avoid such reoccurrences. The patient’s complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Patient Safety Meeting and was brought to the attention of the Executive Safety Leads.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient with concern that she was discharged following her hysterectomy without being reviewed by a Surgeon. The patient also said that she was given no post-operative advice or support and was not given adequate pain relief.

The Trust apologised to the patient for the lack of information and pain relief that she was provided and reassurance was given that this had been discussed with the staff members concerned for reflection and learning. The complaint was also shared anonymously with the wider Gynaecology Team to improve future patient care.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay she had experienced receiving care from the Pain Clinic. The patient explained that she had not heard from the team since July 2020 and had suffered for 2 years without pain relief.

We acknowledged that this is not the standard of service that we aim to deliver and contact was made with the patient to arrange her an appointment. Additionally, a request was made for her most recent imaging to be reviewed, to progress her care appropriately.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient raised concern that she was discharged home without pain relief, was not referred to the Fracture Clinic and her wound was not appropriately washed out.

Apologies were given for the patient’s experience and she was reassured that the Emergency Nurse Practitioner (ENP) who saw her at the time will write a reflection based on the care provided. The ENP will also engage in a reflective discussion, in order to support them to consider how they can improve the quality of the care that they provide going forward.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the communications she had received from the Breast Surgery Department. The patient raised concern that she had been given conflicting information regarding her treatment and had lost faith in the team caring for her.

The Trust apologised to the patient for the transcribing error made by the clinician and acknowledged the distress that this had caused. The patient was seen by a different Surgeon who was able to provide an in-depth explanation and clarification of her results and she was subsequently referred to the Oncology Team for treatment. Reassurance was given that the patient was seen within the appropriate timeframes, despite the error.

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding her mother’s attendance in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern was raised that her mother was left covered in her own blood, her discharge summary was inaccurate and she was sent home with a cannula in situ.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that the care and treatment she received in the ED was inadequate. The patient was provided with an amended discharge summary and a discussion was held with the ED Nursing and Management Teams regarding the patient’s care.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding her daughter’s experience at the Trust when she suffered a miscarriage. Concerns were raised regarding the lack of urgency in the Emergency Department (ED) and queries were raised around the decisions made by the Gynaecology Team.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that there were gaps in her care. Reassurance was given that the staff involved had appropriately reflected on the care provided to her and it was explained that the complaint would be discussed anonymously at the Surrey Heartlands Joint Maternity and Neonatal Monthly Serious Review and Closure Panel to encourage learning.  

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the lack of response he had received from the Access and Medicine Division to his enquiry raised via the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) regarding his DVLA form.

The Trust apologised for the difficulties the patient encountered in getting his DVLA Safe to Drive form completed and signed. It was acknowledged that these delays were unacceptable and the clinicians involved were reminded of the importance of completing these forms in a timely manner.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the lack of communication he received prior to his Urology procedure, causing him to miss an appointment.  The patient also raised concern regarding the conditions in the Surgical Short Stay Unit (SSSU) and the delay in receiving his histology results.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that as a result of his correspondence, a generic Urology email account had been requested to enable the Administration Team to track and record communication in relation to patient appointments. It was explained that the heating on the SSSU had been reviewed and the unit now remains at a suitable temperature. Additionally, the Pathology Team will flag supplementary histopathology reports to the appropriate Medical Team to ensure that they are reviewed and reported on in a timely manner.  

 

The Trust received a complaint from the son of a deceased patient regarding his mother’s admission to the Trust. The son raised concern that his mother’s pain was poorly managed prior to her death and that their family were not well supported by the Nursing Team after she passed away.

 

The Trust apologised for the family’s experience and explained that as a result of the concerns that they had raised, the Nursing Team were reminded of the importance of actively monitoring patient pain and informing the Medical Team at an earlier stage if it is not being appropriately managed. The Clandon Ward Nursing Team are to undergo additional end of life training and watch an educational video pertaining to care, compassion and communication with patients and their families, to help ensure that such instances do not reoccur.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment provided to her late father at Haslemere Hospital. The daughter raised concern regarding the suitability of the dressings that were used and the lack of compassion demonstrated by a member of the Nursing Team.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and reassurance was given that the staff involved had taken the time to reflect on the care provided to the patient. Full explanations of the choice and rationale of the dressings used and all questions and queries raised to the letter of complaint were fully responded to.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his discharge from the Trust following his day surgery. The patient raised concern that he felt that his discharge was poorly planned and carried out.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that this had been fed back to the relevant teams for reflection and learning. The patient was seen in clinic by his Consultant and his wound was appropriately dressed.

 

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her son received in the Emergency Department (ED). The mother raised concern that her son suffered a dissected carotid artery and that this was missed by a doctor in the ED and the Radiology Team who reported on his scan.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s diagnosis was missed and explained that this had been discussed with 4Ways, whom we outsource our out of hour scanning to. It was concluded that unfortunately, this incident was a result of human error and the reporting Radiologist took the time to reflect on the incident. An addendum was added to the original imaging report for accuracy.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experience in the Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit (EPAU). The patient raised concerns regarding the lack of communication that was had with her regarding her examination and that her consent was not sought for this to be conducted as a teaching session.

We apologised for the patient’s experience in the EPAU and acknowledged that her consent had not been appropriately obtained prior to beginning the teaching session. We explained that the Nurse Chaperone was in place to support the patient during her examination and we apologised that this was not explained at the time. The Trust confirmed that no Continuing Professional Development (CPD) hours were generated from this patient's attendance as per her request.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experience in the Occupational Therapy Department. The patient raised concerns regarding written communications and failed communications with her.

We apologised to the patient for her experience and provided reassurance that the written handouts in the department would be updated. Additionally, the wider team were reminded of the importance of noting and observing patient contact preferences and the staff member concerned was reminded of the need for referrals to be completed as a priority and queries to be responded to in a timely manner.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a visitor to the Trust. The visitor raised concern regarding people smoking within the hospital grounds and outside the main entrance.

The Trust provided explanations as to the actions taken to prevent people from smoking on the premises and acknowledgement was given that this continues to be an issue for our Security Team. Apologies were given to the visitor for her experience, particularly in light of her lung condition.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon. The patient felt that he was rude and dismissive towards her during her outpatient appointment and did not investigate her symptoms and concerns appropriately.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and provided reassurance from the Clinical Director of the department that the Consultant’s clinical judgement was appropriate at the time. It was explained that the Consultant was asked to reflect on these matters and include as part of his next appraisal.

Complaint received from the family of a patient regarding the lack of communication that the Trust had with them when the patient passed away in an ambulance and was subsequently brought into our Emergency Department (ED). Concern that they were not made aware of the sequence of events that had occurred which caused them significant distress.

The Trust offered sincere condolences to the patient’s family and recognised that the lack of information that had been provided to them had caused additional distress. The Trust provided reassurance that efforts were made by the ED Team to contact the patient’s partner and explained that the confusion surrounding the communication of the patient’s death to the family was due to it being unclear as to whether this had been communicated to them previously by the Police or the Ambulance Crew.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the brother-in-law of a patient regarding the care that he received from the Ageing and Health Team. Concern that he was discharged home with a lack of information relating to two prescribed medications and that his RESPECT form was not appropriately completed.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and that the RESPECT form was not completed correctly and acknowledged that errors were made with regards to the patient’s medications due to inadequate communication. Reassurance was given that the Pharmacy Team will discuss the issues raised in their next team meeting to encourage reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude of a doctor during her outpatient appointment in the Rheumatology Department. The patient felt that the doctor was unprepared, did not answer her questions and that he was rude towards her.

We apologised to the patient for her experience and provided reassurance that this had been shared with the doctor concerned by the Chief of Service for the Division. As the patient had a number of outstanding clinical questions, the Trust offered to organise her an outpatient appointment in order for these matters to be addressed.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s recent Urology surgery. Concerns raised regarding his fitness for discharge and the lack of support he was given post-discharge. The patient was subsequently admitted to Frimley Park Hospital with serious post-operative complications.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her father received during his admission. Concern that he found it difficult to understand what staff were saying, that he was ignored by a nurse whilst having his blood taken and was sent home with a cannula in situ.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that this had been shared with the staff members who cared for him for reflection and learning. With regards to the cannula that was left in situ, the complainant was reassured that the patient’s case would be discussed as part of the team’s safety huddles to remind all staff of the importance of carrying out pre-discharge checks to the appropriate standard.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his admission at the Trust. Concerns raised that his surgery was postponed several times, he was not provided with updates regarding his situation and his discharge was prolonged and poorly managed.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that due to an unprecedented number of patients attending our Emergency Department (ED) at the time, we were unable to complete his surgery as soon as we would have liked to. We provided reassurance that the patient’s concerns had been shared with the Nursing and Medical Teams and it was explained that an information leaflet will be created to be provided to patients being admitted for emergency surgery going forward.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a doctor working in the Paediatric Department. Concern that the doctor displayed threatening behaviour towards her and that this had a negative impact on both hers and her sons mental health.

The Trust apologised for the complainant’s experience and recognised that the conversation that was had with her was not conducted in the appropriate manner or environment. Reassurance was given that the doctor concerned has reflected on the complainant’s experience and will be taking the opportunity to consider these matters going forward through a formal meeting with the Clinical Director of the department.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding the lack of care and treatment her daughter received in the Emergency Department (ED) and on Onslow Ward. Concern that she was left for long periods of time with no assistance, conflicting information was given to the family and that there was a lack of support given when the patient passed away.

The Trust sincerely apologised for the complainant and patient’s experience and recognised that this is not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. It was recognised that there were delays in delivering patient care in the ED, for which we are in the process of recruiting a Clinical Quality Lead Nurse. Apologies were given regarding the conflicting visiting advice the family received.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she had received under the care of the Colorectal Surgery Department. Concern that her consent was not obtained prior to her procedure, her private history had been shared widely, she was not provided with adequate aftercare and now experiences significantly more pain than she did beforehand.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the behaviour of a doctor during her outpatient appointment in the Rheumatology Department. Concern that the doctor gave her information linked to his private practice, asked inappropriate questions and that the clinic letter she received after the appointment was inconsistent with the advice that the doctor had given her verbally.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and her correspondence was shared with the doctor concerned who also extended his apologies to the patient. Reassurance was given that the patient’s care would be transferred to another Consultant going forward and that the complaint had been shared with the Chief of Service for the Division.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Consultant Radiologist during her appointment with him. Concern that he was condescending towards her and she felt like an inconvenience.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient and provided reassurance that this had been shared with the Consultant concerned. The Consultant has since discussed the events that had occurred with his colleagues in order to reflect on his practice.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Radiology doctor during her mammogram. Concern that the doctor was dismissive, disrespectful and rude.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that her concerns had been shared with both the doctor involved and anonymously with the wider team for reflection and learning. The Trust acknowledged that good, concise communication with patients is paramount and that this will be reinforced at the next team meeting.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received from a Consultant Gastroenterologist. The patient felt that the Consultant was cold and unhelpful towards her and her subsequent discharge letter contained inaccuracies.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided explanations as to why particular decisions had been made in relation to her care. The Trust also apologised for the inaccuracies in the patient’s discharge letter and this was amended accordingly.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her daughter received on Clandon Ward. Concerns raised regarding staff attitudes towards patients with challenging needs.

We apologised for the patient and complainant’s experience and provided reassurance that this had been shared with the Ward Team for reflection and learning. The Trust also apologised that an early referral was not made to the Learning Disabilities Nurse Specialist during the patient’s stay and the importance of adhering to this pathway was reiterated to the Ward Teams.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the incorrect drug dosage he was prescribed in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient was subsequently informed by Frimley Park Hospital that he had been prescribed a significantly higher dosage than he should have been.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and it was acknowledged that the dose of Clopidogrel he received was too high. The patient was reassured that the risks associated with this had now passed and that he would not suffer any long term effects. This complaint was shared anonymously with the Wider ED Team to ensure learning and the prescribing doctor was asked to write a reflective statement.

 

A complaint was received from the partner of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her partner received in the Emergency Department (ED) and on Onslow Ward. Concerns raised regarding nursing care, bed moves, infection control measures and basic care.

The Trust apologised for the patient and complainant’s experience and recognised that this was not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. This was fed back to the Wider Team for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient with concern that she may have undergone unnecessary surgery for breast cancer. The patient explained that upsetting news was delivered to her over the telephone, her biopsy result may have been mixed-up with another patient’s and her surgery took place 14 weeks after her diagnosis.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the length of time he spent trying to find a car parking space at the Trust. Concern that he had to cancel his appointment, damaged his wheel and has queried as to why there are no Car Parking Attendees to manage the traffic flow.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained the measures being undertaken to try and alleviate the lack of parking spaces. The Trust acknowledged that this had become more of a problem since the COVID 19 pandemic and explained that a planning application for a new multi-story car park has been submitted and this has now been approved.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experiences in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern that her pain was not adequately controlled, her results were given to her in front of other patients and she felt that staff were unsympathetic towards her.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient, the lack of privacy that was provided and the attitude of the Triage Nurse who saw her. We provided reassurance that the ED Senior Nursing Team had discussed this matter with the Triage Nurse directly to encourage reflection and learning.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that he has received from the Urology Department. Concerns raised that his investigations and procedures had been poorly planned, leading to a delay in his diagnosis and treatment for possible cancer.

The Trust apologised to the patient for his experience and acknowledged that, when patients anxieties are particularly heightened, communications can be misunderstood or misinterpreted. It was identified that going forward, the Consultant Anaesthetist and Surgeon should both be present to support patients and clarify information when required.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her knee fracture which was missed in the Emergency Department (ED). This was later identified by a Physiotherapist and the patient is now awaiting a full knee replacement.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the father of a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of staff towards him and his partner during his son’s admission. Concern that staff shouted at them, ignored them, did not complete his son’s discharge appropriately and advised them not to return within 2 weeks.

The Trust apologised for the complainant’s experience and provided reassurance that the care and treatment given to the patient was timely and appropriate. The complaint was shared with the Nursing Team to enable them to reflect on the care provided and the importance of providing empathic care was reinforced.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her mother received under the care of the Cardiology and Emergency Teams. Concerns raised regarding the decisions made by these teams and her mother’s fitness for discharge.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that the doctor who saw the patient in the Emergency Department (ED) may not have given due consideration to the differential diagnoses. Reassurance was provided that a new, electrocardiogram (ECG) quality assurance process has been implemented in the ED to prevent such instances from reoccurring.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her post-operative experience. The patient raised concerns that she suffered from complications following her epidural including left foot paralysis and a wound infection.

We wrote to the patient to inform her that her case had been discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and recognised that a more formal, thorough investigation into the concerns that she had raised would be required. The patient was informed that the Clinical Governance Team would be writing to her to explain this in further detail.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the after-care she received from the Trust following the death of her twin babies. The patient raised concern that she felt that her after-care was poorly managed, which caused her additional distress and subsequently led to delays in arranging her babies funerals.

The Trust sincerely apologised for the family’s very upsetting experience and acknowledged that the after-care provided was not of the expected standard. In order to ensure that this does not happen again, we arranged additional training for our Bereavement Team to help them manage similar situations in the future. We also reassured the patient that her complaint would be shared anonymously with the wider team for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her post-operative care. The patient raised concern that she had to move ward, her appointment was cancelled and her discharge medication was incorrect.

The Trust reassured the patient that her complaint had been shared with the doctor concerned for reflection and learning and her discharge summary was amended and a copy of the new version sent through to her GP.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the son of a patient regarding his father’s care, treatment and discharge from the Trust. The complainant raised concern that his father developed a Grade 4 pressure sore, contracted COVID-19 during his admission and that his discharge was poorly planned.

We wrote to the complainant to inform him that his father’s case had been discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and recognised that a more formal, thorough investigation into the concerns that had been raised would be required. The complainant was informed that the Clinical Governance Team would be writing to him to explain this in further detail.

 

A complaint was received from the niece of a patient regarding her aunt’s discharge from the Trust/ The complainant raised concern that she felt that her aunt was not fit for discharge, was sent home with the inappropriate medication and was subsequently re-admitted to a neighbouring Trust the following day.

We wrote to the complainant to inform her that her aunt’s case had been discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and recognised that a more formal, thorough investigation into the concerns that had been raised would be required. The complainant was informed that the Clinical Governance Team would be writing to her to explain this in further detail.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband received during his admission. The complainant raised concern that she felt that her husband was not fit for discharge, that he had not received assistance for personal hygiene and that the equipment needed for his care home had not been provided.

The Trust apologised to the complainant for hers and her husband’s experience and provided reassurance that this had been shared anonymously with the teams for reflection and learning. The Occupational Therapy Team explained that they are currently working on improving their communication pathways in order to prevent similar situations from reoccurring in the future.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient with concern that the Laboratory had lost her son’s blood slide. The complainant explained that this had caused a 2-week delay in her son’s treatment and meant that he would now have to undergo further blood testing.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s blood film was lost, despite the appropriate Policies and Procedures being in place. Reassurance was provided that checks had been made to ensure that staff were all aware of the correct procedures, are trained and competency assessed and have read all relevant documentation.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s experience in the Emergency Department (ED). The complainant raised concern that she was unable to accompany her husband into the department (despite being his carer) and that he was left in his wheelchair for 4 hours without assistance.

The Trust apologised for the patient and complainant’s experience and acknowledged that the complainant should have been allowed into the department, as her husband’s main carer. Reassurance was given that the complaint had been shared anonymously with the team for learning and reflection and that the ED have since implemented measures to streamline the patient assessment process.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experience in the Emergency Department (ED) with the on-call Oncology Team. The patient raised concerns regarding the team’s attitude towards her, their lack of familiarity with her case and the length of time she spent waiting to be seen.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that this is not the standard of service that we aim to deliver. We provided reassurance that this had been fed back to the individuals concerned for reflection and learning and that the Oncology Management Team are reviewing staffing levels on a daily basis to try and prevent other patients experiencing similar delays in the future.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband received in the Emergency Department (ED). The complainant raised concern that her husband was discharged without having had any scans and was prescribed no medication and was subsequently diagnosed with cancer in his lung, spine, ribs and shoulder.

We wrote to the complainant to inform her that her husband’s case had been discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and it was recognised that a more formal, thorough investigation into the concerns that had been raised would be required. The complainant was informed that the Clinical Governance Team would be writing to her to explain this in further detail.

 

The Trust received a complaint via Surrey Heartlands Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) from the daughter of a patient with concern that her mother was left without food or water for 3 days during her admission. As a result, the patient became anaemic, dehydrated, malnourished and weak.

We sincerely apologised for the lack of communication between the Theatre and Ward Teams that resulted in the patient being kept nil by mouth longer than she should have been. The complainant was informed that as a result of her mother’s experience, the Matron for Surgery will be reviewing the current practice and speaking with both teams to gain ideas from them on how to improve our processes. Additionally, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) will be written which clearly documents whose responsibility it is to inform the Ward Teams of cancellations in Theatre.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a clinic letter she received from a Consultant Neurologist. The patient raised concern that the letter informed her of a diagnosis of extensive brain disease, which she had not been made aware of previously.

We apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that this was a copy of a clinic letter addressed to her GP. We acknowledged that the medical terminology used, to the GP, had caused her distress and provided reassurance that her brain condition was not concerning and we suggested ongoing monitoring by the GP.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the information she had received from the Pregnancy Advice Line. The patient was later advised that this information was incorrect and that, had she been given the correct information, she would have been able to deliver her baby in hospital and not at home.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that she had been given inappropriate advice by the Call a Midwife Advice Line. We provide reassurance that this had been shared with the team anonymously for reflection and learning and a new automated message has been implemented, which is activated during periods of high activity, and provides direct telephone contact information for the Labour Ward at the Trust.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s admission to the Trust. The complainant raised concern that her husband was discharged home without being made aware that he had a spinal compression fracture and was not given adequate pain relief.

The Trust apologised that the patient was not informed of his spinal compression fracture during his admission and provided reassurance that the patient's outcome had not been affected by the management that was provided by the Medical Team during the admission. It was identified that the patient's discharge documentation was inadequate which caused difficulties for the GP in providing ongoing care. This case will be shared with the new Junior Doctors cohort at the upcoming Ward Governance Meeting.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her procedure under the care of the Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) Team at the Trust. The patient raised concern that she had sustained cosmetic damage to her face during the procedure and that she had difficulty contacting the ENT Team to discuss this.

The Trust recognised that the patient was provided with a lack of information regarding the possibility of skin staining following her procedure and recognised that clear explanations should have been provided during the pre-operative process. This has been fed back to the wider ENT Team for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a claimant regarding the length of time it had taken for the Legal Services Department to resolve his claim.

The Trust apologised for the delay in responding to the claim and explained that this was due to staff shortages in the Legal Services Department at the time. Reassurance was provided that the department now has additional administrative support and support from the Trust’s Solicitors.

 

A complaint was received from a patient with concern that her pain-relief was poorly managed post-operatively. The patient also felt that the staff caring for her were dismissive of her situation.

The Trust apologised for the significant pain that the patient experienced following her procedure and that clear explanations were not given to her as to the types of pain relief that would be provided. As a result of the complaint, staff working in the Post-Anaesthetics Care Unit (PACU) will undergo further training in pain and fluid management and the PACU Nursing Team will consider the current process for patients attending for these types of procedures, to see if any improvements can be made in their pathway.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding the care her daughter received at the Trust when she attended for a colonoscopy under sedation. The complainant raised concern that she felt that this was poorly managed as the procedure could not proceed, which caused distress to both her and her daughter.

The Trust apologised that the Anaesthetics Department were not made aware of the patient’s Prader Willi status prior to her arrival in the Endoscopy Unit. The Trust provided reassurance that a checklist will be developed to identify patients who may benefit from a pre-operative assessment,  prior to Propofol based procedures and to consider learning disabilities within this group.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the son of a patient regarding the postponement of his father’s surgery. The complainant explained that his father’s surgery had been postponed 5 times and he had been kept nil by mouth on several occasions.

We sincerely apologised for the patient’s experience and explained the circumstances around each of the cancelled surgeries. We provided reassurance that going forward, the Urology Team will only rebook surgical cases when all members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) are available to avoid any unnecessary cancellations.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that he has received in the Emergency and Urology Departments. The patient raised concern that he was left in significant pain for several hours with post-operative complications.

The Trust explained that whilst the Emergency Team recognised the patient’s need for a cubicle, there were none available at the time due to the high acuity in the department at the time. The Trust apologised for the patient's experience, that he was kept waiting longer than we would have hoped and that he was not provided with the appropriate pain relief. This was fed back to the wider ED Team as part of their daily huddles.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her pre-operative experience. The patient felt that she was given very short notice to attend her pre-operative assessment and that she did not receive the appropriate communications from the Day Surgery Unit regarding delays.

The Trust apologised for the length of time the patient spent waiting for her surgery and reassured her that the Women and Children's Management Team would be reviewing the times in which patients are asked to be admitted to ensure that these delays are avoided in future. Apologies were also given for the short notice pre-operative assessment appointment and reassurance given that this had been discussed with the Admission Department Managers and Pre-Operative Team who will work closely to review the process of contacting patients for their assessments and ways to improve it.

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a paediatric patient regarding his attendance in the Emergency Department. Concerns raised that the nurses attempting to take blood from the patient used excessive restraint causing bruising and indentation marks.

The Trust apologises for the patient and complainant’s experience and explained that, whilst this incident was distressing for them both, the restraint used was reasonable and in line with the Royal College of Nursing guidelines regarding the use of physical holding.

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment provided to her son when he fractured his arm. Concerns that this was initially misdiagnosed, that this has delayed appropriate treatment being given, prolonged the patient’s pain and may impact his long-term recovery from his injury.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of communication her husband received following her operation at the Trust. Concern that her husband was not updated immediately after her operation and, despite requests, the doctor did not call again for several days after he informed the patent’s husband that she had been scanned for a possible stroke.

The Trust apologised for the delay in communicating with the patient's husband after her surgery and for the upset and concern caused. The Trust thanked the complainant for bringing these matters to their attention and recognised that this had helped to encourage service improvements.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a nurse working in the Endoscopy Unit. The patient raised concern that the nurse did not appreciate the reasons why the patient was refusing to wear a face mask and the patient requested an apology for her experience.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and reassured her that the staff involved have reflected on the concerns raised in the complaint. In light of the complaint, the Endoscopy Unit changed their practice to prevent this situation occurring again.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the behaviour of a Consultant during his procedure. The patient raised concern that the Consultant ignored the patient's requests, which caused distress.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and the Consultant concerned acknowledged that her behaviour, whilst unintentional, was inappropriate. The Consultant also telephoned and wrote to the patient directly to apologise and reflected on the concerns raised in the complaint.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care she had received in the Respiratory Medicine Department. The patient raised a number of concerns regarding the attitude of the Consultant who saw her, administrative processes and an incorrect diagnosis.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and provided reassurance that her correspondence had been shared with the Consultant concerned for reflection and learning. The patient was booked a follow up appointment with a new Consultant and provided with the date and time for this.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a doctor during her outpatient appointment. The patient raised concern that the doctor did not listen to her during her consultation and she subsequently felt belittled.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and acknowledged that the standard of service the Trust aims to deliver had not been met on this occasion. The doctor involved carefully considered the concerns raised in the complaint and wrote a reflection of the events in his training e-portfolio to help him understand how he can improve his practice going forward.

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife received in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient recalls being asked to come back in for an operation however when she arrived for this, the team told her that they had no record of her operation, could not locate her x-rays and advised that we do not perform such operations at our Trust.

The Trust apologised for the shortcomings that occurred and for the understandable concern that this had caused. The complainant was reassured that these matters had been shared anonymously with the wider teams for reflection and learning, to help ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received in the Emergency Department (ED) when suffering from a miscarriage. Concern that her husband was not allowed in with her, staff did not communicate with each other effectively and lacked compassion towards her

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and recognised that her husband should have been allowed into the ED with her. This was feedback to the ED Nursing Team for reflection and learning. With regards to the patient's concerns in relation to her examination, this was discussed with the doctor concerned and their clinical supervisor and the doctor was reminded of the importance of ensuring that all patients are provided with the appropriate privacy and dignity when undertaking intimate examinations.

A complaint was received from the father of a patient with concern that he had not been informed of his daughter’s PET scan results. The complainant also raised concern regarding the Speech and Language Therapy Team (SALT) at the Trust and their lack of communication with the patient’s Community Therapist.

The Trust apologised that the complainant was not contacted with his daughter's scan results and explained that unfortunately, they had not been reported as quickly as they had initially anticipated that they would be. The Trust explained that in order to prevent instances like these from reoccurring, the wards will increase communication with relatives to manage their expectations around receiving results.

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding the care her husband received in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern that her husband was expected to queue outside in snowy weather, despite having major surgery 3 weeks prior and and that the doctors were unable to establish the correct 'feed' for him despite him only being recently discharged from the Trust.

The Trust apologised for the experience of the patient and complainant and explained that due to staff changeovers and miscommunication in the ED, staff were not prepared for the patient's arrival. It was identified that this shortcoming was as a result of human error and the complaint was shared anonymously within the wider ED Team for reflection and learning.

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient with concern that the Trust was negligent towards her father. The daughter has said that there was a lack of communication with her and her family, the patient was not given medications and that the patient was found dead on the floor in his room.

The Trust apologised for the communication issues that occurred during the patient's admission and recognised that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on how families are updated. Reassurance was provided to the complainant that her father received all the appropriate medications and was checked regularly by the nursing staff.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the fall her mother had during her admission. The complainant has raised concerns surrounding the events of the fall and feels that this directly led to her being put on end of life care.

The case was discussed at the Executive Patient Safety Meeting and it was felt that a more comprehensive investigation would be required to look into the events that occurred during the patient's admission. It was therefore decided that a Learning Panel would be held and the complainant was informed of this in writing.

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding the care that her husband received as an inpatient on Millbridge Ward. Concerns raised that her husband was discharged home with a moisture sore on his buttocks, that it was difficult to communicate with the ward during his admission and that he was sent home with soiled clothing in a bag after a month long hospital stay.

The Trust apologised for the concerns raised and acknowledged that there were shortcomings in the care provided to the patient. Recognising that improvements are required, the Trust implemented changes to improve both the communication on Millbridge Ward and to the ward's patient discharge process. The Trust apologised for the patient's wound and for not arranging a District Nurse referral for wound care at home. The ward has ensured that all the ward staff have been reminded about the importance of sending District Nurse referrals.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she had received in the Gynaecology Department and particularly the difficulties in communicating with the teams. Concerns also raised regarding her communications with the Radiology and Cardiology Departments.

The Trust apologised for the shortcomings that occurred during the patient's experience at the Trust and provided her with a copy of a requested clinic letter. The complaint was shared anonymously with the wider team for reflection and learning and it was recognised that a number of the communication issues that occurred were as a result of staffing issues in the department at the time, which have since been rectified.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient with concern that her son was examined without her permission during an outpatient appointment in the Paediatrics Department.

The Trust apologised for the complainant and patient's experience and acknowledged that perhaps clearer explanations could have been provided at the time. Reassurance was provided that the doctor was being thorough and appropriate in his examination of the patient. The doctor expressed regret for the distress caused and reflected on this event to avoid such situations occurring in future.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the large blister he developed on his heel following his knee replacement surgery. The patient also raised concern that his discharge information was inaccurate and that he was given the wrong medications to take home.

The Trust provided the patient with an amended discharge summary and addressed the issues relation to his medication as part of a formal complaint response. The patient’s case, in relation to his heel blister, was discussed at the Executive Safety Meeting and declared as a Serious Incident. The patient was informed of this in writing and will be sent a detailed report once complete.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his cancelled surgery at the Nuffield Hospital. Concern that his surgery was cancelled as the surgeon could not be located and was not contactable and that this had a significant impact on the patient as he had a loss of earnings, had spent time isolating and had mentally prepared for the surgery.

The Trust sincerely apologised to the patient for the cancellation of his surgery. It was explained that the surgeon had agreed to do an additional operating list on what would usually be his afternoon off and unfortunately, he sincerely forgot about this list. The patient was reassured that this was a one-off occurrence and not a pattern for this surgeon.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a Midwife. The patient raised concern that that the Midwife did not check on her, did not provide her with assistance when she bled and left her baby alone in her room.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and reassured her that this had been shared with the Midwife concerned for reflection and learning. The patient was reassured that her daughter was not at any risk during the period of time that she was left alone and we recognised that communication between the Trust and the patient could have been improved.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient with concern that her daughter's weight varied significantly from birth to 3 days old. The complainant was informed that this was either as a result of scale calibration or human error and that this would be investigated. To date, they have not received the outcome of this.

The Trust apologised that the complainant had not been informed about the investigation into her daughter's weight loss and acknowledged that the weight loss was likely due to human error. The complaint was shared anonymously with the wider team for learning and reflection. We also explained that work has been undertaken by the Trust in conjunction with our Maternity Voices Partnership to improve communication with parents in future with regards to formula feeding.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her attendance in the Emergency Department (ED). The patient raised concern that the doctor who saw her was dismissive and did not perform a scan to aid diagnosis. The patient came back in the following day and was correctly diagnosed with an injury to her gastrocnemius muscle.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and explained why the patient was asked return for a scan the following day. The doctor concerned used the feedback provided as an opportunity to learn and reflect in order to change his practice in future.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her experience when she attended the Trust for a pacemaker replacement. The patient recalls being in pain during the procedure, suffering a punctured lung and has enclosed photos of the significant bruising that she sustained.

This complaint was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Safety Meeting and a decision was made that this should be declared as a Serious Incident and investigated under the SI process by the Clinical Governance Team. The complainant was informed of this in writing and the complaints case was subsequently closed.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of the doctor who conducted her outpatient appointment in the Gynaecology Department. Concern that no apologies were given for running late, the patient's phone torch was used for the examination and that the doctor made inappropriate comments towards her.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience during her appointment and reassured her that this had been discussed with the doctor concerned. The doctor was asked to write a reflection regarding the patient's experience supported by her Educational Supervisor.

The Trust received a complaint from a mother of a 17 year old patient regarding her daughter's attendance in the Day Surgery Unit. Concern raised that her mother could not accompany her daughter as she was considered an adult, that medical information was not noted and that the complainant was unable to contact the Admissions Department.

The Trust apologised for the shortcomings identified and recognised that the patient should have been given the option, prior to surgery, for her parent to stay with her. This matter was discussed with the Admissions Team and they were reminded of considering the accompanying parent when organising surgery and COVID-19 swabs for patients between the ages of 16-18.

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife received during her 3 admissions to the Trust this year.

Part of the complainant's concerns were addressed through a telephone call with the Matron for the area. The complainant was reassured that the patient was appropriately investigated during her admission. The Trust apologised for any distress caused throughout the process.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her Caesarean Section. Concern raised about the attitude and behaviour of the anaesthetist, the surgeon and her overall surgical experience.

The complaint was shared with the anaesthetist concerned and apologies were given for any upset caused and if explanations were not clearly given. An outpatient appointment was offered to the patient to discuss any further concerns that she may have with a Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the length of time he spent waiting to be seen in the Emergency Department (ED) when he presented with cardiac arrhythmia. The patient raised concern that he was triaged incorrectly and was not monitored whilst he sat waiting to see a doctor.

The Trust apologised to the patient for his experience in the ED, acknowledged that the care and treatment he received was inadequate and recognised the distress this caused.  The patient was reassured that his experience had been shared with the wider team for reflection and learning.

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the lack of spaces in the Trust’s Car Park.

The Trust apologised for the complainant’s experience, particularly in light of the patient’s mobility issues. We provided reassurance that a planning application for a multi-storey car park is being prepared and we invited the complainant to share his views on our current parking facilities through the public consultation process.

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her mother received in the Emergency Assessment Unit (EAU). The complainant raised concern that the patient was inappropriately discharged with the wrong patient’s medications and was subsequently re-admitted later that same day.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, the miscommunication that had occurred and that the patient had been sent home with the wrong medications. We provided reassurance that the medication error had been logged on our incident reporting system, Datix, and a verbal duty of candour was given to the complainant. The EAU Matron explained that a new process had been implemented to ensure that Healthcare Assistant’s check all patient property with a Senior Nurse before a patient is discharged if the Bay Nurse is unavailable.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the inaccuracies of her son’s discharge summary following his admission on Hascombe Ward.

The Trust apologised for the inaccuracies contained in the discharge summary. The summary was amended and a copy of the new version was sent to the complainant, the patient’s GP and filed in the patient’s medical records. The complaint was shared anonymously with the medical staff involved in the patient's care for reflection and learning and the Clinical Director for Paediatrics will be working with the Trainee Doctors to improve the quality of the discharge summaries in future.

A complaint was received from a patient’s sister-in-law regarding the delay in a referral reaching the Trauma and Orthopaedics Department from the Respiratory Medicine Department. The complainant also raised concern regarding the difficulties communicating with the teams and the delay in a biopsy being carried out.

We apologised for the delay in the referral reaching the Trauma and Orthopaedics Department and explained that since this time, all referrals are now sent electronically via email only and are no longer sent via internal mail. The complainant was reassured that despite this initial delay, the patient was treated appropriately within the Trust.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient with concern that her T11 fracture was missed in March 2019 and may have contributed to a possible wedge compression fracture at L3 which was identified in December 2020.

The complaint was discussed at the Executive Safety Meeting and it was identified that a Root Cause Analysis would need to be carried out and a duty of candour provided to the patient. The patient was informed that her complaint had been closed and the issues identified would be investigated by the Clinical Governance Team.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding her mother’s 2^nd COVID Vaccination appointment. The complainant raised concern that her elderly and vulnerable mother arrived for her appointment and spent time waiting outside in the cold, only to be told that her appointment had been cancelled.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and we recognised that whilst we had tried to contact her twice, we should have tried to get through to her on another day. The complainant was reassured that since this time, the Vaccination Hub had reduced the number of people attending the hub each day, to ensure that queues are kept to a minimum. Additionally, a Door Steward had been implemented to provide support in expediting patients over 80 years old to the front of the queue.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the inappropriate behaviour of a male member of staff in the Radiology Department.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that all HR processes will be followed as required and the incident fully investigated.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding a member of staff working in the Main Entrance of the hospital. Concerns raised that the member of staff behaved in an intimidating manner, causing the patient to feel stressed and anxious.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided reassurance that all HR processes will be followed as required and the incident fully investigated.

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient who raised concerns that her husband was not provided with a side room during his admission, despite his pre-existing medical condition. The patient contracted COVID-19 during his admission and sadly passed away at Chichester Hospital shortly after he was discharged from our Trust.

The complaint was discussed at the Executive Safety Meeting and was subsequently declared as a Serious Incident (SI). The patient was informed that her complaint had been closed and would be investigated by the Clinical Governance Team under their SI processes.

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient regarding the lack of car parking spaces available at the Trust. The complainant explained that as a result of being unable to find a car parking space, he missed his wife’s antenatal scan.

The Trust apologised for the complainant’s experience, particularly in light of the patient’s mobility issues. We provided reassurance that a planning application for a multi-storey car park is being prepared and we invited the complainant to share his views on our current parking facilities through the public consultation process.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude of a staff member within the Cedar Centre. Concerns raised regarding their attitude during a telephone call with his wife which he felt was unacceptable.

The Trust apologised for the patient and his wife’s experience and assured him that the Clinical Director had discussed his concerns with the Cedar Centre Team to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding his Urology outpatient appointment bookings and his attendance in the Emergency Department. The patient raised concern that his outpatient appointment was rescheduled without him being informed and a Charge Nurse had ignored his pain and anxiety.

We apologised to the patient for his experiences and provided assurance that our Appointments Centre had been reminded of the importance of checking all appointment letters before they are sent to patients. The concerns were shared with the Charge Nurse who reflected on the patient’s experience to improve his practice in the future.                                     

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the lack of information she was given regarding her daughter’s follow up appointment after she attended the Emergency Department with her.

We apologised that the complainant was not informed that her daughter may be required to come in for a follow-up appointment in the Fracture Clinic. There were a number of shortcomings identified in relation to the complainants experience and we provided assurance that the appropriate action had been taken to ensure that this would not be repeated.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her outpatient appointment in the Cardiology Department. Concern that the Consultant focused on her son’s medical issues in the consultation and not her own.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided explanations as to why the Consultant had enquired about her son’s medical history. In light of the patient’s experience, the Cardiology Department amended their appointment letters to advise patients that an ECG (electrocardiogram) will be required in clinic before they are seen by a Clinician.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulties he had experienced contacting the Respiratory Medicine Department and that he had been unable to resolve his concerns via the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS).

The patient’s concerns were addressed through a telephone conversation with his Consultant Respiratory Physician. The Trust apologised for the delays that the patient had experienced and we were pleased to report that his CT scan did not demonstrate any significant abnormality.

The Trust received a complaint from the sister of a patient who died on Eashing Ward with concern that her sister’s earrings were missing.

Through our complaints investigations, it became apparent that unfortunately the patient’s earrings were disposed of by a member of staff who misinterpreted the complainant’s instructions to “leave them”. The Trust apologised for this.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient with concern that his hip fracture was not diagnosed during his attendance in the Emergency Department. The patient said that he was not physically examined and he was later informed by a Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon that had the fracture been diagnosed at the time, he would have been operated on.

The patient’s case was discussed at the Trust’s Executive Patient Safety Meeting and it was decided that a Learning Panel should be held to identify how we can learn from his experience and how we can prevent instances like these from reoccurring. The patient was informed that his complaint file had been closed and that he would be contacted by our Clinical Governance Team and informed of the Learning Panel process in more detail.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding their experience in the Gastroenterology Department. Concern that despite telephoning the team on several occasion to inform them that she would be unable to attend her appointment, a letter was sent to her GP which she felt was rude and unprofessional.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and offered to write to her new GP to provide information for her future care.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that her and her baby received at the Trust when she gave birth. Concern that her baby was not reviewed in a timely manner and she was discharged with retained placenta.

The Trust recognised that the patient should have been taken to theatre overnight to examine the cause of her bleeding and apologised that this did not happen. We provided assurance that this had been fed back to the relevant teams for learning and reflection.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding his hip replacement surgery which had been cancelled for the fourth time. The patient raised concern regarding his ongoing pain, the inconvenience of COVID19 swab testing and the impact on his ability to work.

The Trust reviewed the patient’s records and identified that his surgery had been cancelled twice and apologised for this. Explanations were provided as to why these cancellations occurred and the patient’s surgery was rebooked towards the end of our investigations.

A complaint was received from a patient via the North East Hampshire and Farnham Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) regarding her difficulty obtaining an MRI scan. 

The Trust apologised that the patient had to chase the Radiology Department on several occasions and provided assurance that her MRI scan needed to be undertaken between 4-6 weeks from the date of her heart attack and it was carried out at the five week mark.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude of a Triage Nurse in the Emergency Department. Concern that the nurse dismissed her symptoms without listening to her medical history and she felt that she lacked empathy and was unprofessional towards her.

The Trust apologised for the attitude of the Triage Nurse and assured the patient that her concerns had been shared with the nurse for reflection and learning.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the attitude of a Plaster Technician in the Fracture Clinic.

We apologised for the patient and her mother’s experience and provided assurance that the Plaster Technician had reflected on their concerns to improve her practice going forward.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her experience with a Community Midwife. Concerns raised regarding her hygiene practices and communication issues that occurred during her appointment.

We apologised for the patient’s experience and assured her that her concerns had been shared with the Midwife and an individual improvement plan had been created for her. This plan focuses on infection control processes, communication, the use of positive language and applying the principles of dignity and respect within care.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude of a Urology Doctor. Concern that he did not appropriately consent her for surgery, was dismissive in his manner and did not provide her with sufficient information.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and assured her that her correspondence had been shared anonymously with the doctor concerned and the wider Urology Medical Team for reflection and learning.

A complaint was receive from the son of a patient with concern that his mother was given a blood transfusion without a blood warmer being used which is contraindicated for her pre-existing medical condition. Concerns raised that his mother’s medical records were not available to the teams caring for her.

The Trust apologised that the patient did not receive her transfusion through a blood warmer and provided assurance that this did not affect her in any way. The complaint was shared anonymously with the team for reflection and learning and we explained that our plans to implement an Electronic Patient Record (EPR) in the near future will help to ensure that our teams can access patient records appropriately.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care he has received from an Anticoagulant Nurse Specialist.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and assured him that he would be seen by a Consultant Haematologist for his future appointments in the department. The nurse was informed of the complaint and provided her apologies for the concern caused.

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient with concerns regarding the nursing care his wife received whilst she was an inpatient at the Trust.

The Trust recognised that the patient’s infection should have been documented on her discharge summary and fed back to her Care Home and we apologised that this did not happen. We explained that according to our documentation, there was no record of a rash on the patient’s palms or armpits and apologised that we could not offer further information in this regard.

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient with concern that her son contracted COVID19 during his admission at the Trust. The complainant felt that the Trust had not fulfilled its duty of care and queried if this incident was related to our Junior Doctors ignoring social distancing measures in the town centre.

The Trust apologised for the concern caused and provided detailed explanations of how infection control measures are implemented within the hospital. We provided reassurance that this incident was not linked to the Junior Doctors social outing.

A complaint was received from a patient with concern that he was refused care in our Emergency Department (ED). The patient presented with lumps and swelling in his face and was told to go to his GP.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided assurance that the Nursing Team in the ED are reviewing the department’s current practice and intend to implement robust training to improve the patient streaming process.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care he received in the Emergency Department. Concerns raised that he was discharged without investigations and was admitted shortly afterwards with a blocked bile duct and jaundice.

The Trust recognised that, in hindsight, it would have been safer to err on the side of caution and to carry out the relevant blood tests if the team were already considering hepatobiliary-related itching. We apologised that this did not happen and assured the patient that this had been fed back to the attending doctor as a means of learning and reflection.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his experience on the Surgical Short Stay Unit (SSSU) Concern that there was no communication with him regarding his delayed procedure and he was left without water or his medications for 12 hours.

We apologised to the patient for his experience and assured him that the SSSU had implemented a process called ‘Sip and Send’ to ensure that patients are provided with water ahead of their surgery. The Nursing Team were reminded of the importance of keeping patients informed of any delays within Theatres.

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding her mother being booked in for telephone consultations despite being profoundly deaf. Concern also raised that her mother had now been discharged from the Trust as she had failed to answer the telephone.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided assurance that her records had now been updated to advise that she should only be booked face-to-face appointments in the future. The complaint was share anonymously with the team working in our Appointments Centre to remind them of the importance of checking any disability flags on patient records before arranging appointments for them.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the delays she had experienced in receiving the patient’s death certificate and that she had not received any information regarding the cause of death.

The Trust apologised for the family’s experience and explained why these delays had occurred. We provided assurance that the complaint would be shared with our Medical Teams for reflection and learning.

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient on behalf of his late wife. Concerns raised regarding his wife’s x-ray scan and that he feels his wife’s life was cut short due to errors made in her care and treatment.

The patient’s case was discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and declared as a Serious Incident. The complaint case was closed and the patient’s husband was informed that he would be contacted by our Clinical Governance Team who would be coordinating the SI investigation. The final SI report will be shared with the patient’s husband once completed.

The Trust received a complaint from the son of a patient with concerns of a possible failed discharge. Concerns raised regarding the inadequate arrangements that were put in place to support the patient at home and that there were inaccuracies in the patient’s discharge notes.

The Trust apologised for the inaccuracies found in the discharge documentation and assured the complainant that this had been fed back to the doctor concerned and their Clinical Supervisor. We explained that unfortunately, the patient’s therapy referral had been incorrectly misfiled and this had now prompted the ward to review their current procedures to ensure that this does not reoccur in the future.

A complaint was received from a patient with concern that, as a result of his contact details being incorrect within our systems, his Maxillofacial surgery was delayed and his discharge information was sent to the wrong GP practice.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that the department have now changed their processes to ensure that patient’s demographic details are checked against our administration system before referral letters can be filed. The patient was assured by his Consultant that his surgery would not have been any more radical had it been performed earlier.

 

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a clinic letter he received following his telephone consultation with the Respiratory Team. The patient raised concern that the letter contained a number of inaccuracies and queried if the Consultant had confused him with another patient.

We apologised that the patient received an inaccurate clinic letter and provided assurance that his personal details had not been sent out to anyone else. It was identified that this shortcoming was due to human error and a new clinic letter was typed and sent out to the patient.

 

Two complaints were received from patients regarding the inappropriate behaviour of a doctor in the Emergency Department.

The Trust apologised to the patients for their experiences and we assured them that they would not be seen by the doctor again for their future care. The complaints were bought to the attention of the Deputy Medical Director who in turn shared the complaints with the doctor concerned for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the father of a patient regarding the attitude of a Porter. The complainant raised concern that the Porter displayed aggressive behaviour and refused to show his ID badge.

The Trust apologised for the behaviour of the Porter and provided assurance that the appropriate HR processes would be implemented.

 

The Trust received a complaint via the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) from a patient regarding the medical advice that they were given by a Doctor during an antenatal telephone consultation.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and assured her that this had been shared with the Doctor concerned for reflection and learning. The patient’s care was transferred to another Consultant and she was informed of this via a telephone call.

 

A complaint was received from the son of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his mother received at the Trust prior to her death. The complainant raised concern that his mother’s chemotherapy was stopped due to COVID, her fractures were not treated, her fall was not investigated and he queried what her cause of death was.

The Trust apologised for the lack of communication and the subsequent distress that this caused. We provided assurance that the patient’s chemotherapy was not stopped due to COVID and was a natural pause in her treatment. All of the complainant’s questions and concerns were answered in detail in a response letter.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the lack of communication between the Rheumatology Department, Health Care at Work and the patient. This resulted in the patient running out of his essential medication.

The Trust apologised that the complainant's communications with the Rheumatology Department were not responded to and explained that this was due to illness across the Rheumatology Team at the time. We provided assurance that the drug efficacy would not have been affected by the omission.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she has received from the Trust following the miscarriage of one of her twins. The patient raised concern that she was not offered the appropriate support and that she was not given the opportunity to raise questions with the team

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and for the lack of information and support given to her by the Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit (EPAU). The Trust confirmed that the treatment provided was appropriate and the doctor involved in the patient’s care apologised for any distress caused by his manner.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding their experience in the Emergency Department. The complainant raised concerns regarding poor communication, the attitude of a Nurse and the potential exposure to COVID.

The Trust apologised for their experience and assured them that their correspondence had been shared with the wider team in the Emergency Department to promote learning and behavioural changes. We explained that the department is currently undergoing a transformation project to improve the streaming and registration processes which we hope will mitigate instances like these reoccurring in the future.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the injury she sustained during her routine fibroscan appointment as a result of a fault with the examination couch in the consultation room.

We apologised to the patient and assured her that the couch was removed from use immediately after her accident before being repaired and undergoing full operational testing. We explained that the couch had passed all relevant Health and Safety Checks but recognised that the patient should have been advised to sit in the middle of the couch before lying down.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband had received in the Emergency and Oncology Departments.

The Trust apologised for their experience and recognised that this is not the standard of service that we aim to deliver. The Lead Nurse for the ED provided a number of actions that will be taken to ensure that this does not happen again to future patients, including learning and reflection for the staff concerned.

 

A complaint was received from the fiancée of a patient regarding the inadequate care and treatment given by the Maxillofacial Department. The complainant raised concerns that she felt that this had jeopardised her fiancée’s life expectancy and sought an urgent review of his case.

This case was discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and was declared a Serious Incident. The complaints case was therefore closed to allow our Clinical Governance Facilitators to conduct a thorough investigation into the case and will report back to the patient and his fiancée once this is completed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient via the Bowel Cancer Screening Hub regarding her bowel screening results. The patient raised concern regarding the test kits that had been sent to her and that her medical records may be inaccurate.

The Trust explained the issues that occurred with the test kits and apologised for the confusion that had been caused. We informed the patient that we could amend her records accordingly with her permission and provided the contact details for this to take place.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient via the Surrey Heartlands Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) regarding the care and treatment that she had received from the Gynaecology Team and the delays surrounding her surgery.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that the current triaging processes within the Gynaecology Department required improvement. We assured the patient that a new process was being implemented and that the learning from her complaint had been anonymously shared with the wider team to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur in the future.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the parents of a patient regarding the four month delay in her x-ray being reported. The parents had received an investigation report from the Trust pertaining to this matter but did not feel that the outcome was satisfactory.

The Trust apologised for the delay in reporting the patient's x-ray and explained the mitigating actions that have been put in place to ensure that it does not happen again including; employing an additional Paediatric Consultant Radiologist, employing an additional Consultant Radiologist, any abnormal results being flagged immediately to the referring clinician and their secretary, any backlogs discussed at a weekly reporting meeting and a new system being implemented.

 

Please note: This list is not finalised as there are still some cases open from this time period that require an outcome. These will be added in due course if they are upheld.

The Trust received a complaint from the partner of a patient regarding the care and treatment that the patient had received in the Emergency Department when she suffered a miscarriage. The complainant raised concern that the doctor who cared for her was unhelpful, vague and unclear.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the complainant and his partner as a result of their experience at the Trust. Explanations were provided as to the events that occurred and we assured the complainant that his concerns regarding the attitude of the staff members he encountered had been discussed with them for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude of a doctor in the Trauma and Orthopaedics Department.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and assured her that her complaint had been shared with the doctor concerned for reflection and learning and that this had also been bought to the attention of his Clinical Supervisor.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her father received at the Trust following a stroke.

This complaint was discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and it was decided that a further investigation would be carried out by our Clinical Governance Team. The initial investigation is now complete and our report has been drafted and will be shared with the family once finalised.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband received at the Trust prior to his death. The complainant raised concerns regarding the attitude of the Nursing Team in the Emergency Department (ED) and miscommunication in the Intensive Care Unit.

The Trust apologised for the behaviour of the staff members in the ED and assured her that the importance of professional presentation had been fed back to them. We also apologised for the miscommunication she experienced in our ICU and recognised the distress that this caused.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding her father’s missed stroke diagnosis. The complainant raised concern that her father received inadequate assessments and was given inappropriate medications.

This complaint was discussed at our Executive Patient Safety Meeting and it was decided that a further investigation would be carried out by our Clinical Governance Team. The initial investigation is now complete and our report has been drafted and will be shared with the family once finalised.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s knee surgery. The complainant raised concern that the patient was prepped for theatre and was then told by the Lead Consultant that his surgery would not be required.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and explained that in light of the patient’s experience, the processes within the department have been reviewed and the need for Clinical Fellows to discuss every case listed or surgery with the Consultant in charge has been reinforced.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she has received under the care of the Gynaecology Team. Specifically; difficulty obtaining antibiotics, lack of investigation into her complications and an injury caused to her ureter during her hysterectomy.

The Trust apologised that the patient's discharge letter was not completed in a timely manner and as a result, she had difficulty obtaining her prescriptions. We assured the patient that this had been fed back to the Junior Doctors to reflect on. We apologised for the damage to her ureter during surgery, and  explained that the damage she sustained during her hysterectomy though regrettable, was a recognised complication of this type of surgery and assured her that her surgeon was a very experienced clinician.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding an outpatient appointment that was booked for her in error by the Maxillofacial Department. The patient called to inform the team that this appointment was not required and still received a letter stating that she would need to be seen

The Trust explained that as we had received a second referral from the patient's GP, another appointment was booked for her which we subsequently recognised was not required. We apologised for the confusion and assured the patient that a note had been added to her records to state that she had not missed any of her appointments.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the conduct of a doctor during her appointment in the Oncology Department. The patient raised concern that the doctor watched her undress whilst the door was locked and she has queried if the examination was necessary.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and recognised that the doctor did not follow Trust guidance as he did not offer her a chaperone. We provided assurance that the patient did require further examinations as per the Breast Cancer National Guidelines. We also advised that in future, all patients will be offered chaperones to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delays she has experienced in the Eye Clinic.

The Trust apologised for the delays the patient experienced in the Eye Clinic and explained that unfortunately, a clinic list was still running for a doctor that had recently left the Trust. These patients had to be absorbed into the other clinics running that day which in turn, caused delays. We provided assurance that this issue has now been rectified.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter-in-law of a patient regarding their outpatient appointment in St Luke's Cancer Centre. They raised concern that the doctor had not checked the patient’s test results; they left the room several times to speak with a Consultant and appeared out of their depth.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused during the consultation and recognised that this is not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. It was recognised that as the clinic was running late, the doctor had not taken the time to familiarise themselves with the patients’ medical records and we provided assurance that the importance of this had been fed back to them for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a telephone consultation that had been booked for him in the Urology Department, despite previously informing us that his is deaf. The patient expressed frustration that his deafness has not been appropriately recorded on the relevant systems

The Trust apologised that the patient was booked a telephone consultation, despite having informed staff that he has a hearing impediment. We provided assurance that this was appropriately recorded in his records and that the staff member concerned had been reminded of the importance of checking all patient details before booking any appointments.

 

A complaint was received from the granddaughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her grandmother received at the Trust. The complainant raised concern that her grandmother had been moved between wards several times despite her vulnerability.

The complainants concerns were addressed through a telephone call with the Acting Divisional Head of Nursing. During this telephone call, the complainant was informed of our blue ribbon 'do not transfer scheme' and she was assured that it would be written in her grandmother's notes that this scheme should apply to her for any future admissions.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding her experience in the Gastroenterology Department. Concern that her referral was not appropriately sent to another Trust, her telephone messages were not responded to and she had not been seen in clinic for several months.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s follow up appointment was not arranged in a timely manner and an appointment was subsequently booked for her. We informed her that the issue had been highlighted to the Divisional Management Team and assurance was provided that the team are working hard to reduce the waiting lists by providing additional clinics.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a follow up appointment that had not been booked to discuss her MRI scan. The patient also raised concern that she had received insufficient information regarding her condition and neither her or her GP had received a copy of the MRI report.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s enquiry was not answered promptly when she contacted the Patient Advice and Liaison Service and recognised that this was due to the response letter being sent by internal mail and not electronically. This was fed back to the Assistant Specialty Manager for the Department to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur going forward. The patient’s outstanding concerns were addressed in an outpatient appointment with her Consultant.

 

Complaint received from the family of a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received at the Trust prior to her death.

This case was discussed at the Executive Patient Safety Meeting and was declared as a Serious Incident. The report has now been shared with the family and the Coroner and apologies were given for poor communication.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she had received at the Trust. The patient raised concern that her results and reports had been lost.

The Trust apologised for the delay in the patient’s test results being reported and for the miscommunications that had occurred. We provided assurance to the patient that the results of her tests were normal.  

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude of a Doctor during her inpatient stay at the Trust.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and assured her that this had been shared with the doctor concerned who reflected on her experience with the support of their Clinical Supervisor.

 

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife had received in the Neurology Department.

The Trust apologised that the patient was not provided with an appointment in a timely manner and assured the complainant that this had been shared with the teams for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the difficulties he experienced with the payment machines in the car park. Concerns were also raised regarding signage in the Emergency Department and the Reception Staff he met on his arrival.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience in the car park and that there were broken payment machines. The patient’s feedback regarding signage was taken to the Trust wide wayfinding exercise and he was assured that the Reception Staff in the Emergency Department would be receiving additional training to ensure that the check in process for patient’s is as efficient as possible.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the complications she experienced following her procedure under the care of the Gynaecology Team and the lack of information she was given regarding the procedure. The patient felt that her Consultant was dismissive of her concerns when she raised them with him.

The Trust identified that the potential risks of the procedure were not discussed with the patient for which we apologised. We also identified that leaflets that should have been provided to the patient were not and this was shared with the Divisional Management Team for reflection and learning.

 

A complaint was from the father of a patient regarding the treatment his son received at the Trust after he lost his teeth in an accident.

The Trust apologised that the patient was not appropriately referred to see the Maxillofacial Team and recognised that this should have happened. As a result of the complaint, a poster was created and displayed in the Emergency Department for triage nurses to follow to ensure that patients who present with an injury like this in the future are treated appropriately. In addition, the Clinical Director for the Department will be adding a section to the departmental induction pack for Doctors specifically relating to Ear, Nose and Throat and Maxillofacial referrals.

 

We received a complaint from a patient who felt that a Gynaecologist at the Trust lacked empathy and did not appropriately listen to her concerns.

An apology was given to the patient regarding the doctor’s manner and we provided assurance that they had reflected on this and learnt from her experience.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s discharge from Haslemere Hospital, the treatment he received during his inpatient stay at the Trust and the attitude of a Porter.

The Trust apologised for the incident involving a Porter and assured the complainant that the appropriate HR action had been taken. Each of the concerns raised in the complainant’s letter were addressed in turn in a written response.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her husband received during his inpatient stay at the Trust. Concern was also raised that her husband’s regular medications were not administered.

The Trust apologised for the shortcomings identified in the patient’s care and we provided assurance that this had been discussed with the staff members concerned. It was identified that there had been a drug error during the patient’s admission due to poor communication between staff members and this was reported and investigated via our internal incident reporting system, Datix.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding his outpatient appointment that had been cancelled without him being informed.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s appointment was cancelled at late notice and that despite leaving voicemail and text messages with the patient, they were not received. We explained that we had unfortunately been unable to find another clinician to cover the clinic and asked the patient to contact our Complaints Team to ensure that we had the correct telephone numbers on record for him.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that the patient had received in the Emergency Department with concern that multiple injuries were missed.

The Trust reviewed the patient’s healthcare records and advised that of the multiple clinicians that saw the patient, no head injury could be found and therefore no head scans were indicated during her initial attendance. We apologised for the distress caused.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding her son’s blood tests which were lost twice.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s bloods had to be taken twice and we advised that unfortunately, due to the time that had lapsed between this incident and the time that the complaint had been raised with us, we had been unable to ascertain exactly why this had happened. We assured the complaint that this had been logged on our internal incident reporting system, Datix, to be looked into further and apologised for the distress caused to the patient.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s discharge from the Trust.

The Trust apologised that there were issues surrounding the patient’s transport arrangements and we recognised that this issue should have been resolved internally at the time. The ward teams were reminded of the importance of ensuring that patients are appropriately dressed in the clothes provided for them to travel home in.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding his misdiagnosis in the Emergency Department. The patient raised concern that as a result of the misdiagnosis, his health was put at significant risk and damage was caused to his heart and lungs.

The Trust apologised that the correct diagnosis was missed during the patient’s attendance and explained why this had occurred. Assurance was provided to the patient that his correspondence had been shared with the doctor who treated him for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the attitude of a doctor.

We apologised for the complainant and patient’s experience and recognised that there were errors in the patient’s booking pathway and misunderstandings by the Clinical Team. We explained that the appointment booking process had undergone significant changes in the past year and that we hope that with the introduction of a new electronic system, it will improve the way that the current referral and booking system is managed.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the waiting times he had experienced for his surgery. The patient raised concern that he had passed the 18-week deadline and did not receive a response from the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) when he contacted them.

The Trust apologised for the delays the patient had experienced in receiving a date for his surgery and explained why this had occurred. The patient was subsequently provided with a date for his surgery.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her father received at the Trust prior to his death. Concern was raised that she was given little to no information regarding his treatment and diagnosis.

The Trust apologised for the communication issues surrounding the patient's treatment and explained why it was necessary for the Pharmacy to contact the patient's family at home to discuss his medications. It was explained that the patient suffered from a rare complication and as such, it would have been extremely difficult for staff to have identified this.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding his outpatient appointment in the Maxillofacial Department. The patient raised concern that he had travelled over 20 miles for his appointment only to be informed that his results were not back yet and could not be discussed.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that in light of this issue, telephone clinics had been introduced to prevent unnecessary journeys to the Trust. The patient was subsequently booked into one of these clinics to discuss his results.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a Welfare Support Worker regarding a patient who was discharged with a cannula in his arm and his DRN form was not returned.

The Trust apologised for these shortcomings and recognised that this had fallen short of the service that we aim to provide. We provided assurance to the complainant that this had been fed back to the teams concerned for reflection and learning.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delays he had experienced in the Cardiology Department. The patient raised concern that he did not receive his results for several months, he had still not been seen by a Consultant and his telephone calls were not answered.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and provided explanations of the action that had been taken by the Cardiology Department following their recent Quality Improvement Event. A telephone consultation was arranged for the patient.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a misdiagnosis. He later attended an outpatient appointment and was admitted for inpatient care.

This was declared as a Serious Incident and is being investigated by our Clinical Governance Facilitators.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received in the Emergency Department in 2017. Concern that her symptoms were not taken seriously, she was misdiagnosed and was discharged twice before she was eventually admitted.

We apologised that the shadowing on the x-ray was missed during the patient’s initial admission which subsequently resulted in a further admission. The patient was assured that her complaint had been shared with the team anonymously and that they were reminded of the importance of clear communication.

 

A complaint was received from a patient who raised concerns as to whether her cancer diagnosis was correct and whether the subsequent surgery was necessary.

This was declared as a Serious Incident and is being investigated by our Clinical Governance Facilitators.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient with several concerns regarding her mother’s discharge from the Trust.

We apologised that the patient’s discharge plans were not appropriately documented in her medical records and for the subsequent effect that this had on the complainant and her family. We also recognised that the patient’s destination should have been checked prior to discharge and this was fed back to the ward team for learning and reflection.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a Consultant with concerns that there had been a breach in her confidentiality.

The complainant was assured that her personal data had not been accessed by her husband and that only the appropriate staff had accessed it.

 

A complaint was received from the brother of a patient who raised concern that his brother was discharged from the Emergency Department despite being in significant pain and had a loss of feeling and movement in his legs. It was later identified that he had broken ribs and broken wrists.

This was declared as a Serious Incident and is being investigated by our Clinical Governance Facilitators.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the nursing care that she received on Compton Ward following her hysterectomy. She raised concern that she was left in discomfort for 12 hours and she was not given a follow-up appointment when she was discharged.

The Trust apologised for the delay in inserting a catheter following the patient’s surgery and explained that following pelvic floor surgery, it is not unusual to experience difficulty urinating.

 

A complaint was received from the mother of a child with concern that her ex-partner had gained access to the ward that her and her child were staying on and that he was not asked a password to enter.  Further concern was raised that he had managed to access the child’s medical records which contained the mother’s contact telephone number.

The Trust apologised that the mother’s contact telephone number was contained within the notes that were released to her ex-partner and recognised the subsequent distress that this had caused. We identified that as the ex-partner had been invited to the ward by the mother herself, the password system was not valid. The Trust was duty bound to report this due to the molestation order that was in place.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her father received prior to his death.

The Trust apologised for a catalogue of errors and recognised the distress caused as a result of the patient and family's experience. We assured the complainant of all the actions taken to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the attitude and behaviour of a member of staff they had spoken with over the telephone.

The Assistant Specialty Manager for the department telephoned the patient to apologise for her experience and reiterated her apology in a written response. Assurance was provided that this had been discussed with the member of staff concerned for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient regarding her son’s cancelled surgery.

We apologised for the distress caused to both the complainant and her son as a result of the difference in clinical opinion given in the Emergency Department and subsequently by the Urology Surgeon. We provided assurance that going forward; all paediatric patients seen in the ED will require a clinic appointment prior to being added to a surgery list.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding an Oncology Registrar and a Specialist Nurse. Concern that her and her husband were not listened to and felt pressured into agreeing to further chemotherapy and that the registrar wrote an unnecessary prescription.

The patient’s complaint was addressed during a clinic appointment where their concerns were discussed and subsequently resolved.

 

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient regarding a private room on the Maternity Ward. He raised concern that due to the location of the room, it was noisy and did not provide peace and privacy.

The Trust apologised for the noise the patient experienced during her stay on Private Room F and assured her that in light of this, a sign has been put on the staff storage room door reminding staff members to be quiet and considerate of patients staying in the adjoining room.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude of a doctor in the Oncology Department. Concern that she was provided with scan results that contained another patient’s name and address and that the doctor had not reviewed her medical records prior to her consultation.

An apology was given regarding the doctor’s lack of preparation for the appointment and the doctor was reminded of the importance of having a nurse present when delivering bad news to patients and their relatives. We provided assurance that the error regarding the patient’s scan results had been amended.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the inappropriate behaviour of the Radiologist who conducted two of her appointments. She subsequently felt uncomfortable and concerned that he was not focused on administering her injection.

The Trust apologised for the patients experience and recognised that this was unacceptable. We assured the patient that the Chief of Service and Clinical Director of the department had spoken with the staff member concerned who assured them that it was not his intention to come across in this manner.

 

The Division are to hold a meeting and discuss chaperone provision for all future appointments of this nature in January 2020.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the Trauma and Orthopaedics Department. He raised concern that he found it extremely difficult to contact a Medical Secretary and could not easily book his appointments or surgery date.

We apologised that the complainant had been unable to reach the Medical Secretaries and assured him that they have been reminded of the importance of answering their telephones where possible.  We informed the patient of his position on the waiting list and how this had been calculated.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern that the Nursing Team did not take her condition seriously and she felt unsafe.

The Trust apologised that the patient's observations were not taken every hour as they should have been and for her poor experience in the ED. We assured her that all matters had been shared with the team anonymously for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient whose 2 week rule appointment has been cancelled several times

The Trust apologised for the repeated text message reminders the patient received and we assured him that we are working with a new and improved system and hope that this will prevent instances like these reoccurring.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she has received in the General Surgery Department. She raised concern that her appointments were not long enough to discuss her concerns and that she was kept nil by mouth prior to her surgery, only for it to subsequently be cancelled.

We apologised that the patient’s surgery was cancelled and explained that this was due to the unpredictability of major cancer surgery. We recognised that she should have been provided with a discharge summary and this was fed back to the team for learning and reflection.

 

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient regarding his wife’s attendance in the Emergency Department (ED) and the delay in her being moved to the Intensive care Unit (ICU).

The complainants concerns were addressed in a telephone call with our ED Lead Nurse and were happy with the outcome.

 

A complaint was received from the partner of a patient regarding the length of time it took to book into the Emergency Department (ED) and the lack of urgency given to the patient’s care.

We apologised for the patient and her partner’s experience and recognised that this is not the standard of service that we aim to deliver. Explanations were provided to the concerns raised.

 

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient regarding her mother's delayed discharge from Ewhurst Ward. Concerns were also raised regarding the difficulty she experienced contacting the ward by telephone.

The Trust apologised that the ward telephone was not answered in a timely manner and assured the complainant that this had been fed back to the team. We recognised that the circumstances surrounding her mother's discharge could have been explained more clearly.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient who raised concern that her son was not treated as a child and was instead treated as an adult at the age of 16.

The Trust assured the complainant that as her son was 16 years old at the time of his attendance, he was appropriately treated as an adult as per our Paediatric Admission Criteria. We apologised that for the shortcomings identified during his stay and the distress caused.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay in his Gastroenterology appointments being booked. He also raised concern that he was discharged by the Dietetics Team without all of his concerns being addressed.

An apology was given and we reassured the patient that the current capacity issues in the Gastroenterology Department are being addressed. The Dietetics Team provided explanations as to why the patient was discharged.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she had received in the Emergency Department (ED). Concern that her symptoms were not taken seriously and as a result, her fractured elbow was missed.

The Trust apologised that her fracture was missed and for the attitude of the Physiotherapist who saw her. We assured her that her correspondence had been shared with the team who treated her to ensure that they could reflect and learn from her experience.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment that he has received from a Consultant Gastroenterologist. He raised concern that there was no empathy displayed and there were delays in his treatment.

We apologised for the miscommunication that occurred regarding the Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) meeting that took place to discuss the patient’s care. The Chief of Service for the Access and Medicine Division contacted the patient to discuss the plan and the outstanding actions on the MDT pathway.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that he received in the Maxillofacial Department. He raised concern that his neck was not dressed appropriately after his procedure and the doctor showed no empathy and provided no explanation regarding the pain that he experienced.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and that he experienced significant pain during his procedure despite being given an extra dose of local anaesthetic. We assured him that this had been fed back to the team for learning and reflection.

The Trust received a complaint from the mother of a patient with concern that her son's hearing problems have not been investigated appropriately.

The Consultant Audiovestibular Physician met with the complainant and explained in detail the patient's clinical condition, it was agreed that a follow-up appointment would be arranged for him in the complex clinic to ensure that he receives the appropriate care for his condition.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay in receiving her Rheumatology follow- up appointments. Queries were raised regarding the Appointments Centre booking processes.

The Trust apologised for the miscommunication the patient received regarding her outpatient appointment and assured her that the Appointments Centre training matrix is being reviewed to help identify areas of improvement and development for the future. The contact details for the Rheumatology Assistant Specialty Manager were provided for future use.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay in his Cardiology outpatient appointment being arranged. He raised concerns regarding the lack of information he has been given and the difficulty he has experienced contacting the department.

The Trust apologised for the issues that the patient has experienced in the Cardiology Department. We provided information to the patient on action that has been taken to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur in the future.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient and her husband with concern that when she attended the Clinical Measurement Clinic, the member of staff conducting the appointment did not have sight of her medical records or history. The test subsequently had to be aborted.

The patient was assured that in light of their experience, the department have started to send out questionnaires with patient appointment letters to ensure that the team have all of the required information ready for their appointments.

 

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding the care and treatment that her daughter received after giving birth. Concerns were raised that her symptoms of swelling were dismissed and she was not given the appropriate assistance by the Nursing or Medical Teams caring for her.

The Trust apologised that the patient’s scan was not performed earlier and we recognised the distress caused. This was fed back to the Nursing and Medical Teams for reflection.

 

The Trust received an email from a patient regarding the delay in receiving her Ophthalmology outpatient appointments.

We apologised for the delays the patient experienced and we recognised that this was due to the capacity pressures on the department at the time. We assured her that the Appointments Centre have since reviewed their internal processes and have made an immediate change in the information provided to Ophthalmology patients telephoning to chase their overdue appointments.

 

A complaint was received from a patient who received an "After your operation" questionnaire. The patient has raised concern because she didn't have her surgery as it was postponed due to her allergy to nickel.

The Trust apologised for the questionnaire being sent despite the surgery not taking place and assured the complainant that this had been fed back to the department.

 

A complaint was received from the grandmother of a patient with concern that her grandson's symptoms were not taken seriously when he was admitted to Hascombe Ward. The patient was discharged and subsequently required an urgent admission at Epsom General Hospital.

The Clinical Director of Paediatrics reviewed the patient’s medical records and recognised that he should have been kept in overnight and apologised that this did not happen. The complaint was shared anonymously at the Junior Doctors Educational Meeting to ensure that lessons were learned from this incident.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of information he was given about the possibility of developing malignant spinal cord compression. He raised concern that if it had been investigated earlier it could have considerably changed his outcome.

This complaint was declared a Serious Incident and was investigated by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators.

 

A complaint was received from a patient’s solicitors regarding a pressure sore their client obtained during their admission at the Trust. A number of specific questions were raised regarding the patient's care.

The Trust provided all information requested and assured the complainant that the patient was treated appropriately during her admission.

 

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient regarding her son’s prescription which was issued by the Trust. When she tried to collect this from the pharmacy, she was informed that they were unable to issue the prescription due to her son’s age.

The Paediatric Team apologised for the error and assured the complainant that the guidelines surrounding the prescription of this particular drug were shared with the team to remind them of the age limits.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding a misdiagnosis of his broken ribs and the ineffective pain relief he was prescribed.

We apologised for the distress caused to the patient and assured him that his treatment at the time of his presentation was appropriate given his symptoms. We recognised that on his repeat x-ray, his fractures were visible and assured him that his case would be discussed in the Radiology Department’s discrepancy meeting.

 

A complaint was received from the family of a patient regarding the care and treatment that the patient received prior to his death.

We apologised that the patient’s prognosis was given over the telephoned and recognised that this was unacceptable. This was shared with the Medical Teams to reinforce the importance of compassionate and respectful communication with families and their relatives going forward.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care and treatment he received during his Gastroenterology appointment. He also raised concern that his liver cyst did not show up on any of his scans.

The patient was offered an outpatient appointment in order to address the clinical concerns he had raised with a Consultant.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the relative of a patient regarding how her and her family were treated during their visits to Hindhead Ward.

We apologised for their experience and recognised that this is not the standard of service that the Trust aims to deliver. We assured them that their experience had been shared anonymously with the ward teams for reflection and learning.

 

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of information she received regarding her MRI scan results.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient and assured her that going forward, the Oncology Department will arrange for all patients to be seen for a follow up appointment in clinic to discuss their scan results.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the lack of information sent to her and her GP following her tests in the Cardiology Department. When she did receive her clinic letter it contained a number of inaccuracies.

We apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that this was due to a shortage of secretaries in the department at the time. We provided assurance that the department is now fully staffed and therefore there should be no delays in clinic letters being typed and sent going forward.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the difficulty he has experienced re-arranging his Physiotherapy appointments.

Through investigating the complaint, we identified that the appointment letters sent to patients contained an incorrect telephone number. We have since removed this number from our letters and apologised for the difficulty the patient experienced.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her knee replacement surgery which had been repeatedly cancelled. She also raised concern that she had received a letter stating that she had missed several outpatient appointments when she had not.

The Trust apologised for the number of cancellations she had experienced and explained the reasons behind them. The patient’s clinic letter was amended to accurately reflect that she had not missed her outpatient appointments.

 

A complaint was received from the son of a patient regarding the delays he had observed in medication being prescribed on Chilworth Ward.

We apologised for the delays he had observed and explained that this was due to the significant increase in patients being treated on the ward. We advised that we are mitigating this issue by increasing the production of chemotherapy at the Trust.

 

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her attendance at the Emergency Department in April 2017. She raised concern that her hand injury was not investigated appropriately and she has subsequently experienced 2 years of pain and physiotherapy.

The Trust recognised that the patient’s hand should have been x-rayed and that our standard practice was not followed for which we apologised. The doctor who treated the patient no longer works at the Trust however the complaint was shared anonymously with the Medical Team currently working here to reinforce the importance of following our processes.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delay in receiving his Rheumatology outpatient appointment which was subsequently rescheduled.

It was identified that our patient administration system, APAS, had created an additional clinic in error and we apologised for the subsequent distress caused to the patient. Their appointment was rebooked and communicated to them via telephone.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of communication he received regarding his outpatient appointments resulting in him being nil by mouth for several hours. There was also a delay in him receiving his test results.

An apology was given regarding the instructions provided to the patient about being nil by mouth and these were fed back to the team for future reference. It was identified that the patient’s results were unavailable when he attended the clinic and we recognised that in future, these appointments should be booked at a later date to ensure all results are available for discussion.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delays in his cancer treatment. He raised concern that the Oncology Department did not correctly request his diagnostic tests and that the Urology Department were not appropriately informed of his case.

The Trust apologised for the shortcomings identified and recognised that this was due to miscommunication between the Oncology and Urology Department. As a result of the patient's CT scan request not reaching Guildford Diagnostic Imaging, the Oncology Secretaries were reminded that all referrals must be sent electronically and not via internal mail.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude of an Ophthalmology Doctor during their outpatient appointment.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and assured them that the complaint had been discussed with the doctor concerned for reflection and learning.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient’s wife regarding the care and treatment that her husband has received.

The various treatment options were discussed with the patient and an apology was provided in recognition that the doctor may not have been clear enough in his consultations.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the cancellation of her Cardiology outpatient appointment.

The Trust apologised that the patient did not receive any explanations as to why her appointments were cancelled and these explanations were provided. The patient’s appointment was subsequently rebooked.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding the Chase Hospital. Specifically, her antenatal appointments and blood test results.

An appointment was offered to the patient to take her blood tests in the Trust’s Antenatal Assessment Unit at her convenience.  Contact details were provided for this appointment to be arranged.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delay in receiving her Urology follow up appointments.

The Head of Outpatient Services apologised for the patient’s experience and recognised that this was due to the demand on the Urology Department at the time and the subsequent lack of appointment availability. We assured the complainant that the Appointments Centre is working closely with the Urology Department to rectify this issue.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding her experience in the Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit (EPAU).

The patient was telephoned by a member of the EPAU Team to discuss her concerns and a plan of care was subsequently put in place.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delays in receiving her prescriptions on Chilworth Ward. The patient also raised a query regarding the car parking at the Trust.

The Trust’s Oncology Matron explained the prescription process and apologised for delays the patient had experienced.  Our Oncology Matron assured the patient that the Oncology Team are working closely with their colleagues in the Pharmacy Department to improve the service delivered to their patients.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding the attitude of a porter, a nurse and a doctor when she attended an appointment on Chilworth Ward.

The Trust thanked the patient for her compliments regarding our services and apologised for her experience on this occasion. We assured the patient that the porter had been removed from patient duties until he had undertaken further training to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur. The Oncology Nursing and Medical Teams were also reminded of the importance of good communication with patients at all times.

 

Complaint received from the mother of a patient with concern that she was not promptly informed of her daughter's urine results and her treatment was subsequently delayed. 

The Trust apologised for the delay in providing the urine test results and recognises that this is unacceptable.  An ultrasound scan of the patient’s kidneys was subsequently arranged to ensure that there were no abnormalities.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife received at the Trust when giving birth. Numerous questions were raised following a letter he received in March 2019 by the Clinical Governance Midwife.

The Trust answered the complaints questions and provided the requested guidelines.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding the lack of pain medication provided to him when he attended our Accident and Emergency Department (A&E).  Concerns were raised that he was given the wrong splint and lack of advice regarding his fracture.

The patients concerns were able to be addressed through a telephone conversation with our A&E Lead Nurse.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient regarding the care and treatment that his wife received in the Emergency Assessment Unit (EAU) and on Merrow Ward prior to her death. Concerns were raised regarding the nursing care, his wife's fall, the lack of communication he received from staff and her discharge from the Trust.

The Trust responded to each of the complainant’s queries and explained what happened at the time of his wife’s fall. We apologised for the distress caused and advised that as a result of his experience, catheter care passports have now been placed within our catheter packs so that they are ready for completion on discharge.

 

Complaint received from a patient who raised concern that they had no return journey booked for transport back to Ashford and St Peter's Hospital (ASPH) following their Radiotherapy treatment at our Trust.

It was identified that unfortunately, the Radiotherapy Department were not aware that the patient’s return journey had not been booked by ASPH. The miscommunication was recognised and communicated to the wider team to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

 

Complaint received from a patient with concern that a foreign body can be seen in his arm from scans taken in 2010 which he discovered in March 2019. The patient wanted to know why he was not informed of this in 2010 and why it was not investigated.

The patient’s scan was reviewed by a Consultant Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgeon who advised that it did not appear to be a foreign body but extra bone growth. It was advised that unless the patient was experiencing pain, surgery would not be indicated. The patient was also telephoned by a Cardiology doctor who discussed his concerns with him.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding the poor care and treatment he received in our A&E Department and the poor attitude of a Doctor. The patient also raised concern that he was discharged to soon and was subsequently re- admitted.

The patient received a response from one of our Emergency Medicine Consultants who spoke with the doctor concerned and assured the patient that he had reflected on his experience. We assured the patient that the care and treatment he received in A&E was appropriate given his presentation at the time.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient who sustained a fractured hip after a fall. The fracture was missed on x-ray and CT scan.  The patient was subsequently discharged and when she later attended the Physiotherapy Department for an outpatient appointment, a fracture was identified.

This complaint was declared as a Serious Incident and taken forward by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators. The patient received a Duty of Candour letter informing her of this.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding an appointment booked through St Luke's Cancer Centre for the MRI Department that was not appropriately arranged. The patient subsequently arrived to be informed that no appointment was booked for them and they had to re-attend on another day.

The Trust apologised and identified that the issue was due to an administration error in the MRI Department. A new appointment was arranged for the patient.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her care and treatment in A&E. She raised concern that she had to wait 5 hours to be seen, despite her informing her that she would be seen straight away. The patient also complained that her request for a car parking refund was ignored.

The patients concerns were addressed through a telephone conversation with the Lead Nurse for A&E and the reimbursement for her car parking ticket was granted.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the lack of car parking at the Trust and that the car parking machine didn't produce a ticket. Concerns were also raised that the Cedar Centre have a recorded answer phone message that advise they are unable to answer and you can’t leave a message.

The Trust apologised for the difficulty the patient experienced finding a car parking space and provided information on the action that has been taken in order to rectify the lack of spaces. It was identified that there was a technical fault with the telephones in the Cedar Centre which was subsequently reported and fixed.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the daughter of a patient regarding the failure to x-ray her father in A&E following his fall at home which resulted in a missed hip fracture.

This complaint was declared as a Serious Incident and taken forward by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators. The patient received a Duty of Candour letter informing him of this.

 

Complaint received from a patient regarding the delay they experienced in receiving their cardiology outpatient appointment.

The patients concerns were addressed through a telephone conversation with a Cardiology Secretary and an apology was given for their experience. The patient’s appointment was subsequently bought forward.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient via the Guildford and Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) regarding the waiting list for lung function tests. Concerns were raised that staffing and room planning within the department is inadequate.

An apology was given for the delay in the patient receiving their lung function test. We explained that we are working with other Trusts in order to alleviate the capacity issues and assured the patient that they were at the top of the waiting lists. 

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment that she received on St Catherine's Ward. Concerns were raised regarding the lack of communication, lack of nursing care and that she was left for four hours without being seen.

The patient’s concerns were addressed through a telephone conversation with our Clinical Governance Midwife.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the height of the payment machines in the car park.

We apologised for the complainants experience and assured them that the height of the ticket machines complies with the Disability Discrimination Act (2005). We assured the complainant that in future, a member of the Car Parking Team would be happy to assist him should he require.

 

The Trust received from a patient regarding the A&E Department. She was told that someone would contact her when her prescription was ready to collect however this did not happen.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and identified that this was due to a miscommunication between the A&E and Oncology Departments. The teams have reflected on the patients experience and discussed the issues identified in order to ensure that instances like these do not reoccur.

 

A complaint was received from a patient with concerns regarding the delay in receiving their prescription from St Luke’s Pharmacy.

The Trust apologised for the delays the patient had experienced and provided information on the actions the team are taking to prevent delays such as these in the future.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her experience on Chilworth Ward. Concern that staff are overstretched, treatments are delayed and patients are not treated as individuals.

The Trust apologised for the patient's experience and for the delays she encountered when attending for her chemotherapy treatment. We provided assurance to the patient that steps are being taken to improve these processes and delays.

 

A complaint was received from a patient with concern that she was exposed to unnecessary radiation as she was given another patients treatment.

This complaint was declared as a Serious Incident and taken forward by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators. The patient received a Duty of Candour letter informing her of this.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the husband of a patient, via the Guildford and Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) regarding the lack of communication they have received regarding his wife's care. Concern was also raised regarding the attitude of a secretary.

The Trust apologised for the difficulty the patient experienced contacting the Respiratory Secretaries and for the misinformation she was given regarding her outpatient appointment. The issues regarding the attitude of the secretary were addressed.

 

Complaint received from the daughter of a patient who raised concerns regarding a change in her father’s medication prior to his death.

This complaint was declared as a Serious Incident and taken forward by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators. The patient received a Duty of Candour letter informing him of this.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient via Jeremy Hunt's Office regarding his Rheumatology outpatient appointments.  The patient had travelled from Nottingham University to be informed upon arrival that his appointment had been cancelled.

The Trust apologised for the inconvenience caused and recognised that whilst a letter had been printed and sent to the patient informing him of this cancellation, this was evidently not received.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the care and treatment he received at the Trust whilst he was an inpatient.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient and assured him that the doctor concerned had reflected on his experience.  We assured the patient that his care was in line with the recommended guidelines.

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding her caesarean section and concern that she was given an overdose of diamorph. The patient also raised concern that she has identified a second, unexplained incision mark.

This complaint was investigated as a Learning Panel by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators. A subsequent recommendation was made that if using two syringes of the same size then the syringe containing the remainder of the diamorphine should not be kept on the trolley once the dose required has been removed.

 

A complaint was received from a visitor regarding smoking outside of the Trust and the lack of action taken by the Security staff to stop this.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused and explained that it is not legally enforceable to stop anyone from smoking. We assured the complainant that our signage is regularly reviewed and the Security Staff approach smokers on a daily basis and ask them to stop.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient whose procedure was cancelled at late notice due to her weight. The patient’s weight was documented on her pre-op form and the Doctor who booked her was also aware

The Trust apologised that the patient’s operation was cancelled on the day and recognised that this was our error. We assured the patient of our usual processes and apologised that in this instance this did not happen. The patient was assured that in light of her concerns, the Admissions Team were reminded that dates for surgery should not be arranged until the pre-assessment process has been successfully completed.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay in receiving her test results. The patient was given the results by the receptionist and still has no letter confirming them. Further concern was also raised that when the patient arrived for her Gastroenterology appointment, there was no doctor as they had not returned from Maternity Leave.

An apology was given for not sending a copy of the clinic letter to the patient and for the absence of a Doctor when the patient arrived for her appointment. We assured the complainant that receptionists do not give out test results.

 

A complaint was received from patient regarding the care and treatment she received at the Trust before, during and after the birth of her baby.

The Trust apologised that some aspects of the patient’s care were not provided in a timely manner and we assured her that following our investigation, it was identified that the rest of her assessments were undertaken within an appropriate timeframe.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient who was unhappy with the care and treatment her husband received in our Accident and Emergency Department (A&E).

The Trust apologised that the complainant did not feel that their concerns were taken seriously. The Trust recognised that the doctor did not review the patient’s electrocardiogram (ECG) which should have been done.  The doctor reflected on this and met with the department’s Clinical Director to discuss this and apologised to the complainant and patient.

 

The Trust received a complaint received from a patient regarding the delay in receiving her prescription in the St Luke’s Cancer Centre.

The Oncology Matron apologised for the delay and recognised that this was due to the department being particularly busy on this occasion. We provided assurance that as a result, the Matron would be working closely with her senior nurses on Chilworth Day Unit to ensure that the dispensing process was streamlined.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delay in receiving his follow up appointment after his Urology surgery.

The Prostatectomy Specialist Nurse contacted the patient and apologised via telephone.  The nurse provided the patient with her contact details if there are ever any future appointment issues

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the delay in receiving their Rheumatology prescription.

The patient was contacted directly by our Lead Pharmacist for Rheumatology who apologised for the delays and explained the cause. The patient’s prescription was subsequently sent to them and contact details provided should the patient experience any difficulty in the future.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient regarding the lack of car parking spaces. The patient missed two outpatient appointments due to being unable to find a space.

The Trust apologised for the difficulty the patient experienced and assurance as provided that we are working closely with Guildford Borough Council to rectify the issue.

 

A complaint was received from the wife of a patient regarding her husband’s cardiology appointment and the attitude of the Doctor.

The Trust apologised and assured the complainant that the doctor concerned had reflected on their experience.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the catering whilst on the ward as an in-patient

An apology was sent to the patient and we thanked him for his feedback and suggestions. These were passed to the Trust’s Catering Manager.

 

The Trust received a complaint from the wife of a patient regarding the attitude of an A&E doctor.

The doctor apologised for the distress caused and the Trust assured the complainant that this had been raised with his Line Manager.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient with concern that a registrar had performed her surgery when she was expecting the surgery to be carried out by a consultant and she subsequently experienced complications.

This complaint will be investigated as a Learning Panel and will be investigated by the Trust’s Clinical Governance Facilitators.

 

A complaint was received from a patient regarding appointment reminders he was receiving for his wife who was deceased. This had been reported previously  but no action was taken to prevent it happening again.

The Medical Records Team were contacted and the complainant was assured that his wife’s details had now been appropriately updated. The Trust apologised for the distress caused.

 

A complaint was received from the parents of a patient regarding their daughters care and treatment in A&E and the Emergency Assessment Unit prior to her death.

The Trust apologised for the lack of information provided to the parents during the patients admission and recognised that this would have provided the complainants the opportunity to ask questions and seek reassurances. This complaint was shared anonymously with the Emergency Department Teams for reflection and learning.

 

 A complaint was received from a patient regarding the delays in receiving his prescription from St Luke’s Pharmacy. The patient also raised concern regarding the attitude of staff working in the Pharmacy.

The Trust apologised for the delays the patient experienced and advised that as a result, additional staff had been recruited to help with the workload on the department.

 

The Trust received a complaint from a patient who was dissatisfied with the response received via the Trust’s Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) regarding visitors and noise levels on the Surgical Short Stay Unit (SSSU).

The concerns were discussed with the Matron of SSSU and she has reiterated to staff the importance of adhering to one visitor per patient and enforcing the visiting times when necessary. The Trust apologised for the distress caused.