Ms C complained about the care and treatment provided to her late mother, Mrs B, by the Health Board following hip replacement surgery in December 2023. The investigation considered whether it was clinically appropriate for Mrs B to have a general anaesthetic for her surgery, and whether it was clinically appropriate for Mrs B to have been discharged from hospital following her surgery on 4 January 2024. It also considered whether it was clinically appropriate for Mrs B to have been subsequently discharged from the Emergency Department (“ED”) on 13 February 2024 and 20 February 2024.
The Ombudsman found that the choice of general anaesthetic for Mrs B’s hip surgery was appropriate and in line with accepted good clinical practice. Furthermore, given Mrs B’s condition, it was reasonable to have discharged her on 4 January 2024. Those complaints were not upheld. However, Mrs B was discharged from the ED on 13 February without pneumonia being reasonably explored and diagnosed, and she was therefore discharged without appropriate treatment at that time. That was a service failure and an injustice to her. The Ombudsman upheld this aspect of the complaint. When Mrs B was re-admitted on 19 February with the same symptoms, it was recognised that she had pneumonia, appropriate treatment commenced and her discharge from the ED on 20 February was reasonable. The Ombudsman did not uphold that part of the complaint.
The Health Board agreed to the Ombudsman’s recommendations to provide Ms C with an apology for the failings identified; to review this case in relation to the clinical investigations carried out for Mrs B between 10-13 February 2024 to identify any points of learning which can be applied in future care, and to ensure, as part of a reflective process, that the General Medical Consultant responsible for discharge on 13 February shares details of this case and the Ombudsman’s report at their annual appraisal.