Opthalmology cases
P v The Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation
Trust
Barnaby was born at the Cheltenham General
Hospital on the 10 March 2001 at 30 weeks gestation.
His prematurity and low birth weight gave rise
to a risk of developing Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) which
could result in blindness if not treated. Sadly, that outcome
occurred and Barnaby is functionally blind in both eyes.
The main issue in the case was whether the
Ophthalmic Surgeon should have identified ROP when he examined
Barnaby on the 24 April 2001. The hospital admitted in its defence
that if ROP had been detected, Barnaby’s eyesight would have been
saved, leaving him with reasonable day to day vision.
Proceedings were issued on behalf of Barnaby in
June 2007 and parties exchanged expert evidence from pre-eminent
paediatric ophthalmologists. There was a significant
difference in opinion between the experts as to what the
treating Ophthalmologist could have seen at the 6 week
examination.
The trial was fixed for the 27 October 2008 (on
liability only) and shortly before this, the parties compromised on
a 75:25 basis in Barnaby’s favour.
Barnaby’s mother accepted the offer on the
grounds that there was a real risk that the case would have been
lost at Trial. The amount of compensation to be paid to
Barnaby is yet to be calculated. The case was funded by Legal
Aid.
At the end of the case Barnaby’s mother
said:
“The process of having to re-live the
events surrounding Barnaby's traumatic start to life was
disturbing. The clear advice, support and understanding that you
offered us both has made the ordeal more tolerable! I have always
felt that you were really on "Barnaby's side" and that this has
definitely assisted along the way. There have been several
occasions throughout the case when I have been asked
to consider options and make decisions that I have felt
unqualified to answer and this is when I have most relied on your
professionalism, expertise and integrity. Barnaby is so important
to me and with your help and effective management of the case he
will have a brighter start.”
H v South East London Strategic Health
Authority
Mrs H, now aged 72, a former midwife who had studied law, had
suffered from hypertension since the late 1970s. In addition, from
1985 she was recognised as suffering from diabetes.
We alleged, on her behalf, that the treating clinicians at the
hospital failed to adequately treat or control her diabetes and
hypertension. Specifically, we alleged that there was a failure to
treat her persistently raised blood glucose levels and to take
effective steps to lower her blood pressure.
A secondary consequence of diabetes is the possibility of
diabetic retinopathy which can lead to blindness. Although she
underwent some ophthalmic reviews and had laser treatment, the
treatment was both inadequate and carried out too late.
Sadly and unsurprisingly diabetic retinopathy occurred which led
to total blindness except for limited vision in the right eye.
Further, the delays in treatment resulted in kidney damage and
probable need for future dialysis.
Richard Earle acted for Mrs H in
pursuing a claim for clinical negligence. The hospital defended the
claim largely on the grounds that Mrs H was the author of her own
misfortune. They alleged that she failed to stick to a proper diet
and failed to take her medication as prescribed.
The case was supported by an expert diabetologist and
ophthalmologist and we issued proceedings on Mrs H’s behalf.
The claim was listed for trial in July 2007. A few weeks before
the trial the Defendant’s began to negotiate and Mrs H accepted
£250,000 in compensation.
Mrs H received all her compensation and the Defendant agreed to
pay all her legal costs as well. The case was initially privately
funded and then conducted on a “No win, No fee” basis.
C v. Whipps Cross
Hospital
Samantha Critchley acted for C on a
‘No win, no fee’ basis.
C aged 67, is diabetic. She developed diabetic retinopathy and
maculopathy in both eyes.
She was seen by a Consultant in April 1998. He recommended
surgery, namely vitrectomy, membrane peeling and surgical
enlargement of the posterior capsulotomy with a view to improving
her vision.
The notes stated that “efforts will be made to expedite the
surgery.”
C was seen again in March 1999 by which time she was noted to
have a shallow retinal detachment and her vision had declined from
6/24 to 6/60. She attended further clinics in July and December
1999. The surgery was not performed until 30 March 2000, almost
exactly 2 years after being put on the list.
Post-operatively Mrs C was advised that she would need regular
reviews. These did not happen. Appointments were cancelled on the
12 April, 5 July, 12 July and 25 October 2000.
Eventually C was seen on 18th March 2001. By this time she had
no perception of light vision in the left eye with a total retinal
detachment. The condition of the left eye was inoperable. She was
left effectively blind in that eye.
We successfully contended that there was negligence on the part
of the hospital for the delay in performing surgery and the lack of
post-operative follow-up.
The expert ophthalmic surgeons disagreed, however, on the level
of vision C would have had but for the breach of duty. The
Defendant’s expert evidence was that but for the negligence C would
have had 6/24 vision. Our own expert was of the view that C could
have expected to achieve 6/18 binocular vision with competent
care.
In January 2006 we received an offer to settle C’s claim in the
sum of £33,592.84
The trial was listed to commence on 21 June 2006.
In May 2006 Samantha Critchley settled the claim in the sum of
£91,407.16 so that C would receive £90,000.00 after deductions for
recoverable welfare benefits.
After the case C’s daughter said:-
"...I just wanted to thank you for all your
hard work on my mothers case. We are very pleased with the outcome.
Although no amount of money can really compensate for her eye
sight, hopefully it will enable her to make her life more
comfortable. It took a while to get an outcome but you really
showed your dedication in getting a decent settlement. Thank you
again. My mother has not stopped singing your praises…”