Upheld complaints

A complaint was received from a patient’s son who believed the patient had been a lost to follow up in 2022 for the breast clinic

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience explaining at the time of her appointment the Trust had just transitioned to a new patient records system and her original appointment had been outcome incorrectly. As a result of the complaint a full review of all patients has taken place by the Trust Data Quality team to identify any other patients lost to follow up and to prevent this happening again.

A complaint was received from a patient who had multiple appointment cancellations with Trauma and Orthopaedics which impacted on her recovery.

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience and acknowledges the distress caused by delays in care. At the time, the Trauma and Orthopaedics Team faced significant booking and staffing challenges, which impacted appointment scheduling. In response, new processes have been introduced to improve the management of post-operative reviews and minimise disruption from staff leave or short-notice cancellations. The Trust also sought clinical input to assess the impact of these delays. While the cancellations are not expected to have affected the clinical outcome, the patient’s concerns about recovery and mental wellbeing have been recognised.

A complaint was received from a patient who is deaf. The patient reported that during an outpatient appointment, the doctor was rude, did not recognise that the patient was a lip reader, and failed to meet their accessibility needs. Additionally, no consent was obtained for an assistant or chaperone to be present during an examination. The patient also experienced a long wait in the waiting room and noted that there was no accessibility flag on the electronic record. The patient has requested that a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter be provided for all future appointments.

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience and acknowledges that the consultation did not meet expected standards. The clinician will reflect on the concerns raised and work to improve communication, respect, and privacy in future appointments. A BSL interpreter will be booked for future appointments, and if unavailable, the appointment will be rescheduled. A review of the patient record showed only a minor reference to deafness from birth. A flag will be added to ensure clinicians are aware of hearing needs. The GP referral did not mention deafness, so the patient is advised to raise this with their GP for future referrals.

A complaint was received from a patient who had multiple appointment cancellations with Trauma and Orthopaedics

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience and acknowledges the distress caused by delays in care. At the time, the Trauma and Orthopaedics Team faced significant booking and staffing challenges, which impacted appointment scheduling. In response, new processes have been introduced to improve the management of post-operative reviews and minimise disruption from staff leave or short-notice cancellations

A complaint was received from a patient’s mother regarding the Consultant’s attitude and behaviour during an outpatient appointment.

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience in the Cardiology Department and acknowledges the concerns raised. The patient’s neurodivergent needs were not included in the referral and were only highlighted during the appointment. The clinician has apologised and assured that respectful communication is a priority. To support patients with autism and learning disabilities, it was explained all staff complete mandatory training. A flag can be added to the patient’s record to alert staff to additional needs, with consent. The patient is encouraged to contact the LD&A Team to arrange this and may also find the Hospital Passport helpful in sharing key information to support future care.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the removal of a three-way catheter, which resulted in internal injuries and a nine-day inpatient stay. The patient expressed concern about the impact this has had on their long-term health and wellbeing.

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience and acknowledges the concerns raised regarding the removal of a three-way catheter by a Student Nurse without supervision. This led to prolonged catheterisation, pain, infection, and ongoing fatigue following discharge. The incident has been reviewed to ensure appropriate supervision and care standards are upheld

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy at poor communications with Consultant during pregnancy, delays in diagnosing PSD, decision making in relation to birthing options. Post birth complications and discharge documentation.

The Trust apologises for the shortfalls in communication and continuity of Consultant-led care. Assurances have been provided regarding anaesthetic care, including the use of epidurals.

A complaint was received from a patient who expressed concern about a lack of compassion and flexibility when seeking emergency treatment for a torn retina, followed by the need to attend a breast cancer clinic shortly after.

The Trust apologises for the patient’s experience. The patient felt unsupported by Eye Clinic staff despite being a cancer patient with an urgent appointment. Staff confirmed the patient had a scheduled appointment at another hospital and prioritised ensuring they attended. The clinic is not a walk-in service, and no treatment could be offered at Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust that day. Communication challenges were noted, and the team has been asked to reflect and improve their approach.

A complaint was received from a patient who attended the Emergency Department experiencing a miscarriage. Concerns were raised about poor communication from Gynaecology staff, including lack of explanation prior to examination and absence of informed consent. Additionally, the patient’s discharge summary did not document the removal of pregnancy tissue.

The Trust apologised for the poor communication regarding the procedure to remove pregnancy tissue and the lack of informed consent. The Trust also apologised that the patient was not given an explanation for the decision not to provide pain relief in the Emergency Department, and that alternative pain management options were not explored.

A complaint was received from a patient following a spinal fracture. The patient was advised they had been referred to the neurosurgery spinal fracture clinic at St George’s Hospital. However, when chasing the appointment, they were informed no referral had been made and that their GP should initiate it. The GP advised that the referral was the responsibility of the Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust. At the time of the complaint, the patient was still waiting for an appointment.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The Trust acknowledged that the referral to St George’s Hospital was not made in a timely manner following the patient’s appointment. Assurance was provided that there was no clinical impact or delay in treatment outcome as a result.

A complaint was received from a patient following a Gynaecology appointment. The patient was unhappy with the Consultant’s attitude, describing it as abrupt and rude towards both herself and staff. She reported poor communication before and during the procedure, with no explanation or warning given, resulting in a lack of informed consent and consideration. The patient also expressed concern that internal damage may have occurred.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. A sincere apology was offered for the poor communication regarding the procedure and lack of consent. The patient was reassured and offered an ultrasound scan. Staff involved have reflected on the feedback and taken steps to improve their practice.

A complaint was received from a patient following a Gynaecology procedure. The patient was unhappy with the lack of communication and insufficient information provided to both herself and her GP. Four months post-operation, she had still not received her results, despite repeated calls and reassurances that the information would be shared.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. An apology was given for the poor communication surrounding the procedure and lack of informed consent. The Trust provided the findings following the patient’s surgery and offered a follow-up appointment to discuss any further concerns.

A complaint was received from a patient following attendance at the Emergency Department with a sporting injury. The patient was unhappy that only an X-ray was performed and no referral to Trauma & Orthopaedics was made. When the patient returned after their GP recommended an MRI for suspected soft tissue damage, the Emergency Department declined. Even after a private ultrasound identified severe tendon damage, the Emergency Department still did not refer the patient to the Fracture Clinic.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that errors were made in his care. Learning from the feedback has been shared, and assurance was provided that the patient’s ongoing care will be appropriately managed by the Trauma & Orthopaedics team.

A complaint was received from a patient following attendance at the Emergency Department after a fall. A CT scan confirmed a fractured shoulder. However, upon reviewing her discharge summary via the NHS app, the patient discovered additional findings of a hernia and liver cysts. She has raised concerns about why these findings were not communicated to her at the time of discharge

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that incidental findings were not appropriately communicated. Assurance was given that the GP had access to the full imaging report, but the findings were not highlighted for follow-up. As a result of this complaint, junior clinical staff have been reminded of the importance of informing patients about incidental findings and ensuring clear communication with primary care providers to support continuity of care.

A complaint was received from a patient following attendance at the Emergency Department in June 2025. The patient was unhappy that a fracture in her elbow was missed. She was later seen by a Physiotherapist who referred her to the Fracture Clinic. The patient has also experienced communication difficulties with the Fracture Clinic.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that the fracture to the elbow was not identified during the initial Emergency Department visit or at the subsequent ultrasound appointment. A sincere apology was offered for the missed diagnosis and the distress caused. The Trust confirmed that the Trauma & Orthopaedics team would manage the patient’s ongoing care. As part of the learning, the Emergency Department doctor involved has reflected on the case and used it as a learning opportunity to help prevent similar issues in future.

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with the attitude of a doctor following the birth of her child.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged the inappropriate tone and communication used by the doctor. Although the doctor is no longer employed by the Trust, assurance was provided that feedback will be shared with their new supervisor to support learning and reflection.

A complaint was received from a patient concerns about communication and access to test results, including information shared with their GP (under ICB investigation), the consultant’s attitude during an appointment, being told the Trust does not carry out the test, difficulty accessing results via the NHS App, and still awaiting an appointment to discuss results.

The Trust acknowledged the feedback provided and recognised the importance of strengthening partnerships and improving patient experience. Assurance was given that your input has informed actions under review, including reception practices, booking system accessibility, and staff communication standards. These priorities continue to receive oversight at Board level to support learning and improvement.

A complaint was received from a patient who attended the Emergency Department, they were concerned the correct protocol was not followed and there was a delay to another Trust for specialist surgery.  

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, acknowledging that the correct protocol had not been followed. It was confirmed that staff involved had received additional training

A complaint was received from a patient who had received a diagnosis of a tumour on the brain, the patient had several neurology appointment cancelled, and consultant letters contain inappropriate information.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, including the cancellations of appointments. Assurance was provided that the Consultant has been spoken to regarding the content of the clinic letter.

A complaint was received from a patient who had a lesion removed from her cheek by her GP in September 2024. The sample was sent to the hospital for analysis, and the patient was advised there could be a wait of up to 12 weeks for the results. After following up with her GP, she was informed that the hospital had not yet communicated the biopsy results. The results later confirmed a diagnosis of lentigo maligna melanoma. The patient expressed concern about the potential spread of the cancer and the impact of the delayed diagnosis.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, including the delay in receiving biopsy results. Assurance was provided that the error in the electronic system has been identified, and a review is being undertaken to prevent recurrence. 

A complaint was received from a wife of a patient that her husband developed pressure sores whilst an inpatient.

The Trust apologised that the patient developed a pressure ulcer during their admission. Assurance was provided that Waterlow scores and risk assessments were carried out regularly. The criteria for specialist equipment were explained, and it was acknowledged that although the threshold was not technically met, staff should exercise clinical judgement in such cases.

A complaint was received from a visitor regarding the attitude and behaviour of a car parking office attendant. Concerns were raised about the registration process for Blue Badge holders, including the placement of QR codes, which were reportedly too high for wheelchair users to scan. The visitor also highlighted that the Group Nexus website was down, with no interim support provided to patients. Additional concerns included a lack of understanding from parking staff and poor customer service support.

The Trust apologised for the visitor’s experience. Feedback was shared with the staff member involved for reflection and learning. An alternative paper-based registration process has been introduced for those experiencing difficulties with the online system. Feedback regarding the height of QR codes has led to the installation of new signage at heights more suitable for wheelchair users.

A complaint was received from a patient who attended the Emergency Department at six weeks pregnant due to hyperemesis. The patient reported receiving an excessive dose of anti-sickness medication and was subsequently warned by a doctor about potential risks of abnormalities to the baby. She also raised concerns about a four-hour delay in the Emergency Department contacting or referring her to St Catherine’s Ward.

The Trust apologised for the administration of medication that could have impacted the health of the unborn baby. It was acknowledged that the patient should not have been directed to the Emergency Department by the ward. Assurance was provided that the Duty of Candour was followed appropriately, and detailed advice regarding the very low risk of side effects was given by both the ED doctor and the Women and Children’s team. The patient was also signposted to further support services.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient, raising concerns about the Discharge Team. She reported being unable to contact the team, leaving multiple voicemails that went unanswered. As her father was keen to return home, a suitable agency was sourced to support his nasogastric (NG) care at home, which was accepted by the ICB. However, the agency has not received the agreed funding. The daughter has since been informed that the Discharge Team failed to complete the necessary paperwork.

The Trust offered condolences to the family, as the patient had sadly passed away since the complaint was received. The Trust apologised for the family’s experience and acknowledged shortcomings in communication.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude and actions of a nurse in the Emergency Department. The patient reported being denied pain relief after vomiting the initial dose, and later being refused IV paracetamol despite it being prescribed by a doctor. The patient also stated they were left in urine for several hours, raising concerns about dignity and continence care.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience in the Emergency Department, including the lack of care and dignity shown by the agency nurse. Assurance was provided that feedback has been submitted to the Temporary Staffing Team, and the nurse has been blocked from future shifts pending investigation. The Trust confirmed that concerns have been raised with the agency regarding the nurse’s fitness to practise, and the patient has been signposted to further support.

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy after attending an appointment where she was able to check in, only to discover after waiting for an hour that the Consultant was not running a clinic that day. The patient had only received a text reminder and confirmed the cancellation by calling the department.

The Trust apologised for the Patients experience due to an administrative oversight, the patient was not removed from the clinic list when this was cancelled and was therefore not notified of the cancellation. Measures implemented to ensure this does not reoccur.

A complaint was received from the husband of a patient, raising concerns that surgical glue was used on all three laparoscopic wound sites despite multiple attempts to inform staff of the patient’s allergy. The husband reported that the patient experienced itching and facial swelling, and later attended the Emergency Department with symptoms consistent with an allergic reaction to the glue.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, acknowledging that surgical glue was used despite the patient and her family repeatedly flagging an allergy. Assurance was provided that learning has been identified, particularly regarding the importance of adhering to the WHO surgical safety checklist.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient, who expressed concern that the baby formula provided was spoiled. She also reported that staff did not respond appropriately to her concerns, and no tests were conducted to verify the formula's condition

The Trust apologised for the experience during the patient’s admission, where he was given infant formula believed to be spoiled. Although immediate action was taken and an investigation launched, communication delays and lack of initial testing contributed to the distress. Measures have since been implemented to improve parental escalation pathways, enhance staff awareness, and strengthen milk storage monitoring to prevent recurrence.

A complaint was received from a patient who was dissatisfied with her plastics appointment. She was seen by a new Consultant who discharged her from the service due to her intention to conceive. The patient states she did not consent to being discharged and continues to experience pain from existing lipomas. She is autistic and has requested to be reinstated under the care of her previous Consultant, expressing that she does not wish to be seen by the new Consultant again.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused during the patient’s plastics appointment. Following a discussion with the service manager, the patient was satisfied with the outcome and has since attended a consultation with a different consultant. The Consultant involved has been spoken to for learning and reflection. Measures have been taken to ensure appropriate follow-up and communication.

A complaint was received from a patient who raised several concerns following her C-section, including delays in receiving pain relief, lack of postnatal support, insufficient assistance with mobility and personal care, and poor communication at the time of discharge.

The Trust apologised that the patient was not provided adequate support post-Caesarean section and for the delays in providing her with pain relief.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the attitude of a nursing staff member following her C-section. The patient reported a lack of empathy and was questioned about her decision to attend RSFT rather than her local hospital. Additionally, she stated that she was not assisted in obtaining formula for her baby.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience on the Postnatal Ward, where she reported a lack of empathy from a staff member and inadequate support following her C-section. The staff member involved was spoken to for reflection, and a wider reminder was issued to reinforce the importance of non-judgemental, personalised care. Measures have been implemented to ensure staff are aware of the impact of their behaviour and to improve support for postnatal patients.

A complaint was received from the patient’s father.  The patient’s father is unhappy the patient was discharged from the Emergency with low oxygen stats.  

The Trust apologised that the correct protocol was not followed the error was identified witih 2 hours of discharge and the patient was called back to the hospital for further monitoring. 

A complaint was received from the patient’s father who was unhappy with the care in the Emergency Department and Hascombe Ward due to the patient being discharged without parental concerns being listen too.  Patient was readmitted and after tests was given a diagnosis and treated.  

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor communication & experience in ED and on Hascombe and the teams involved and have reflected on the incident and taken learning from the complaint. 

A complaint was received from a patient who was initially misdiagnosed and when given the correct diagnosis required a surgical procedure.

The Trust apologised for the patients misdiagnosis and identified the patient should have had a CT scan earlier.  

A complaint was received from a patient’s mother expressing her upset regarding an email which she received from a specialist nurse indicating she was using her NHS connections inappropriately

The Trust recognised the email was in appropriate and apologised for the distress caused.   

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient, raising concerns about the communication between the ward and the family. Additional concerns were noted regarding the standard of nursing care & discharge planning. It was also highlighted that the patient’s next of kin contact details had not been updated, despite multiple requests.

The Trust apologised for the family’s poor communication & experience on the ward.

A complaint was received from a patient’s mother that her son was given 10 x the dose of medication he required despite the mother raising a concern about the dosage with the Nurse.

The Trust apologised for the medication error and provided reassurance that there had not been an overdose and the error was due to a different concentration being given. The complaint was shared anonymously with the team for learning. 

A complaint was received from a mother of a baby raising concerns following her C-section when her baby was removed for an injection before mum could hold the baby.  The nurse administering the injection pricked herself with the needle and used the same needle to inject the baby.

The Trust apologised for the incident and confirmed that, following the event, it was reported appropriately in line with the correct protocol and escalation procedures.  

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about the attitude and behaviour of a HCA in the Emergency Department.

The Trust apologised for the attitude and behaviour of the staff member, acknowledging that it did not align with the Trust’s values. The staff member was spoken to and reminded of the expected standards and behaviours in line with those values.

A complaint was received from a patient who was dissatisfied with the advice provided by the midwife hotline. The patient was advised to attend the Emergency Department rather than go directly to the maternity unit, which resulted in a prolonged wait.

The Trust apologised for the incorrect advice given and apologised that the antenatal protocol was not followed.  

A complaint was received from a patient regarding the care they received following their surgical procedure. The patient expressed concerns about a lack of communication related to their chemotherapy, including the likelihood of cancer recurrence. Additionally, the absence of vital documentation specifically their height and weight which led to delays in commencing chemotherapy treatment.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and provided clarification and reassurance regarding the appropriateness of the treatment regimen. The Trust also acknowledged and apologised for the poor documentation, including errors in the height and weight measurements entered into the system, which contributed to the delay in treatment.

A complaint was received from a patient who had initially been referred to Dermatology (a service not provided by RSCH ), and was subsequently re-referred to Maxillofacial at RSFT following the identification of a subcutaneous tumour. The patient questioned whether this referral pathway was appropriate, expressing concerns about a delay in diagnosis and a potentially incorrect referral. Additional issues were raised regarding the surgical procedure, including the absence of a biopsy, the size of the wound, lack of support, and being lost to follow-up.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged the delay between the histology report and diagnosis, which was due to the lack of reallocation of patients following the departure of a Locum Doctor. The Trust also apologised for poor communication regarding the surgical procedure and the support provided at the time of diagnosis.

A complaint was received from the patient’s mother.  The patient’s mother raised concerns about the content of a referral letter to another Hospital

The Trust apologised for the patients experience; the patient’s records were updated to reflect the correct information.

A complaint was received from a patient who was not followed up with the appropriate surveillance following lung cancer treatment.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s poor experience and committed to a full review of how lung patients are managed after completing treatment.

A complaint was received from a patient who experienced an inordinate delay in receiving the report for their MRI scan and delay in receiving an appointment to discuss the results. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience regarding the delays with the patients MRI scan results.  The Trust advised of a revised process for managing referrals and confirmed a clinic appointment for the patient.

A complaint was received from a patient under Trauma & Orthopaedics who was waiting for a follow-up appointment. The patient had no communication from the Trust and contacted the Trust to arrange the appointment. The patient attended the appointment and was informed by a member of the reception team that the appointment had been cancelled and she could not be seen. A nurse intervened, and the patient was seen in the clinic.

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience, explaining that due to an administrative error, the patient had been discharged. The Trust also apologised for the perceived attitude of the reception team staff member. Lessons have been learned from the complaint, and further training provided for the staff involved.

A complaint was received from a Patient unhappy with the attitude of a Midwife

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience. The midwife has apologised, reflected on the incident, and taken learning from the complaint.

A complaint was received from a patient; the patient's blood samples were mislabelled, resulting in an incorrect diagnosis and unnecessary medication being prescribed. Concerns were also raised about the attitude of a midwife.

The Trust apologised for the error and reassured the patient   the complaint investigation identified the blood sample from another patient had been linked to the patients record in error.  The Trust acknowledge the other patient had been contacted about the error.  The midwife has apologised and attended further training. 

A complaint was received from a Patient who was unhappy with the content of their clinic letter following two appointments and the delay in getting the results of a MRI.

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience. The patient's letter has been revised, and the clinician has reflected on the importance of including all relevant information in clinic letters.

A complaint was received from a Patient’s relative indicating the Emergency Department had been misdiagnosed.

The Trust apologised that the patient was misdiagnosed.  The Doctor has reflected on the incident and taken learning from the complaint.

A complaint was received from a Patient who was offered ENT Surgery in January 2025 by the Admissions team.  The patient received a subsequent letter removing him from the waiting list as the patient was not available until January 2025. 

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience. It was explained that the Patient Access Policy had been incorrectly applied. The patient was reinstated to the correct place on the waiting list. The staff members involved have reflected on the incident and taken learning from it.

A complaint was received from a Patient raising concerns about a Health Care Assistant (HCA) in the Emergency Department.

The Trust apologised for the patient's poor experience, acknowledging that the staff member's communication did not align with the Trust's values. The staff member has reflected on the incident, apologised for their unacceptable behaviour, and expressed remorse.

A complaint was received from a Patient who requested a copies of their medical records.  Patient asked why they weren’t informed by the Safeguarding Team that the Trust had received a malicious communication.

A complaint was received from a patient who had given birth, and the baby was taken away for medication to be administered before the patient was able to hold the baby. Concerns were raised that the nurse administering the medication via injection pricked herself and then used the same needle on the baby.

The Trust apologised for the incident. Staff have been briefed about the importance of placing the baby on the mother immediately after birth. Additionally, staff have been briefed about needle stick injuries and reminded of the relevant policy.

A complaint was received from a patient’s mother who was upset with an email sent by a Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS).

The Trust apologised for the patient's mother's poor experience. The CNS has been spoken to, reflected on the email sent, and apologised for the inappropriateness of the email.

A complaint was received from a patient’s daughter. T he patient’s daughter raised concerns about the patient’s care and communication, in his last couple of days specifically relating to end of life pathway and non-invasive ventilation. 

The Trust sent their condolences and apologised for the distress caused, recognising that this was not the standard of care the Trust aims to deliver. A reflective multi-disciplinary meeting has taken place to review the patient's end-of-life pathway. The Trust has sought to gain national guidelines, as there currently aren't any to support patients with this particular condition. The complaint has been shared anonymously with the teams involved in the patient's care for further reflection and learning.

A complaint was received from a mother who was unhappy with the treatment and care her daughter received as an inpatient.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that this was not the standard of care that the Trust aims to deliver.  The Trust apologised for the miscommunication with nursing staff and for the shortcomings in care. 

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with the lack of timely post-surgery follow-up appointments. The patient had to chase appointments, and when they attended, the appointments were rushed. They were given conflicting advice and no guidance on medication. The patient had issues with wound healing, which has led to the need for additional wound care.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and acknowledged that this was not the standard of care that the Trust aims to deliver. The team overseeing the patient's care has revised their post-operation appointments process to prevent patients from having to chase or wait for an appointment. The patient was given an appointment to see the Nurse-led wound care clinic.

A complaint was received from a patient about the delays and administrative errors that resulted in a CT scan request under the two-week rule taking five weeks.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The original GP referral to the Trust had been sent to the incorrect team due to human error, it was returned to the GP rather than being referred internally to the correct team. It was identified that this was due to a training issue, as the staff member involved was new to the role, and further training has been provided.

A complaint has been received from a patient who was given the incorrect advice about medication needed for a procedure whilst breast feeding.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience and explained that the manufacturer and the Medicines Information (a pharmacy department at another Trust whose role is to provide information on the use of medicines) provided conflicting information. The Trust acknowledged that this information should have been shared with the patient so they could make an informed decision. The department involved has revised their Patient Information Leaflets and implemented a new process to support patients in similar circumstances.

A complaint has been received from a patient’s mother who was unhappy with the management of her child’s care under the Paediatric team due to appointments continually being cancelled and rearranged.  

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, explaining that the Consultant had taken unplanned leave. The patient has now been given a new appointment date.

A complaint has been received from a patient who was unhappy that their Trauma & Orthopaedic appointment had been cancelled three times. The patient attended an appointment and, on arrival, was told it had been cancelled and they hadn’t been notified.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The Trust explained that the patient's appointments were cancelled due to clinical priorities for the Consultants, which led to their clinics being cancelled. The Trust found that the appointment cancellation process had not been followed correctly. The complaint has been shared with the staff member involved, highlighting the need for further training for the team.

A complaint has been received from a patient who was unhappy that their Trauma & Orthopaedic appointment had been cancelled four times.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The Trust explained that the patient's appointments were cancelled due to the Consultant's changing work pattern, and was subsequently booked into a clinic that was no longer running. The patient was reassured the Trauma and Orthopaedic department is undertaking improvement measures for clinic management.

A complaint has been received from a patient who was referred for a procedure, due to the referral being unclear the patient was booked into the wrong surgical list. 

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. Following the complaint, the departmental Matron has contacted referring clinicians, advising them to provide detailed referrals. A process has been put in place with the Administrative team to refer any poorly completed referrals to the Matron.

A complaint has been received from a patient whose respiratory procedure had been cancelled six times.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The Respiratory team apologised for the delay in requesting the procedure, the incomplete referral document, and the cancellations. The Respiratory team discussed the complaint in their governance meeting and reiterated to clinicians the importance of ensuring that documents are completed correctly.

A complaint was received from a patient regarding her care under the Gynaecology team, the cancellation of a planned procedure at short notice, and the need for further tests.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The Gynaecology team explained that the cancellation was necessary because further tests were required, due to the patient initially seeing a locum consultant and her surgical procedure being carried out by a Trust Consultant. The Gynaecology team has reviewed their administrative processes to ensure this does not happen again.

A complaint was received from the mother of a patient who was unhappy that we missed a fracture on the patient's face when he attended the Emergency Department.  The patient subsequently attended another Trust and underwent emergency surgery.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience, explaining that the patient did not meet the criteria for a Computed Tomography (CT) scan and that the patient’s case was not discussed with the Duty Consultant or referred to maxillofacial team.  The complaint has been shared with the doctor involved for their reflection and learning. The Emergency Department has implemented dedicated junior doctor training sessions for facial injuries, and senior doctors have been briefed to offer support in case management to ensure all necessary assessments and investigations are conducted.

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient who was unhappy with the poor communication the patient received from the anaesthetics and surgical teams when the patient attended for an eye procedure. The patient has impaired hearing and was distressed and in pain throughout the procedure.

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient by the issues with the anaesthetic. Duty of candour was completed, and measures have been put in place for any future attendances by the patient. The Trust also provided assurance that no harm to the patient's eyesight has been caused by the procedure.

A complaint was received from an advocate on behalf of the patient, raising concerns that she was not referred by another Trust to the maxillofacial team in a timely manner despite the suspicion that she may have skin cancer. Once referred to the maxillofacial team, the patient experienced several delays, including the removal of the tumour, delays in histology, and the lack of a clear treatment plan. Additionally, the patient received very poor communication from the maxillofacial team

The Trust apologised for the distress caused to the patient, as well as for the delays and poor communication. The Maxillofacial team identified that the patient had not been reallocated to another clinician when the original clinician overseeing the patient left the Trust.

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about the attitude and behaviour of a consultant.

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

A complaint was received from the daughter of a patient who had to wait a lengthy time for patient transport after attended an outpatient appointment. While waiting, the patient was only offered one drink. When the patient was collected and taken home, she was left in her front room in her wheelchair with no food or drink, and her front door was left unlocked.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience. The patient had been booked on patient transport at a set time, but due to demands on Patient Transport, the contractor could not meet the agreed time (the patient transport contractor provided their complaint response directly to the daughter). The outpatient team apologised for not offering refreshments more than once and have implemented a better process to support patients waiting for transport.

A complaint was received from a patient who was unhappy with their pre and post-surgical care in Elective Surgery Unit and Compton Ward.

The Trust apologised for the patient’s experience.  T he complaint has highlight several areas of learning that has been shared with the teams involved in the care of the patient.

A complaint was received from a patient raising concerns about the attitude and behaviour of a doctor, and how the doctor communicated their diagnosis.

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 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.