first knee arthroscopy on the 05/01/2016 re done on the 19/02/2016 the third time will be at a different hospital extremely unhappy in
pain they don't return calls or emails told to go to a&e after f
first knee arthroscopy on the 05/01/2016 re done on the 19/02/2016 the third time will be at a different hospital extremely unhappy in
pain they don't return calls or emails told to go to a&e after finally getting hold of them a&e would not look at as it was on private
health care weeks of unnecessary pain having to attend new hospital to have the surgery done for the third time
Client Response:Patient A was referred to Rowley with pain in his left and right knee with the left knee worse than the right. On examination in out patients he walked with an antalgic gait and was having to use a stick. He had pain over the medial and lateral compartment and patella femoral irritability. His left knee was stable to varus valgus stress, Lachman's test showed grade 1 laxity. The right knee patella femoral irritability he had pain over the medial compartment, can flex knee from 0 degrees through to 110 degrees with pain over the medial compartment. The diagnosis of bilateral medial meniscal tears but also patella femoral symptoms in the left knee. An MRI of both knees was requested with follow up regarding the results.
Patient A was followed up in November 2015 following his MRI. Mild to moderate patella femoral findings in his left knee as well as the right knee with a horizontal tear in his lateral meniscus on the right. His left knee continues to give him pain and discomfort. Conservative versus surgical treatment options were discussed. Patient A wished to go forward with surgery and have a knee arthroscopy. Patient A understood the risks and benefits of the procedure and was happy with these. Patient A was scheduled for a left knee arthroscopy for chondroplasty to be performed his patella femoral joint.
Right knee surgery undertaken without complication. Aspirate taken intra operatively with no micro-organisms detected.
Patient A returned for surgery to repair his right knee via arthroscopy in January 2016. Again, risks explained to the patient, pain, infection, bleeding, stiffness and recurrence of symptoms. The procedure was undertaken without complication and aspirate sent for microbiology with no growth.
Patient A was reviewed in clinic as fluid had accumulated in his right knee. The knee was aspirated in clinic with no growth in microbiology. Patient A was given further up follow up appointment for review with the Consultant. On second consultation, the surgeon felt further aspiration would not be beneficial as he felt the fluid would re-accumulate. The management plan to undertake an arthroscopy and synovial biopsy was discussed with debridement if necessary. The operation scheduled for later that week.
The second surgery was uneventful with biopsies sent. Tissue report, acute supportive synovitis. Patient A was reviewed in clinic, wound healing well, no evidence of infection, wound clean and intact, sutures removed easily. No requirement for antibiotics as no evidence of infection/inflammation.
Patient A was provided two follow up appointments with the consultant. Both appointments, the patient did not attend. The consultant noted the wound had been packed by a district nurse who dressed with a wick which was removed at Rowley Hall Hospital.
Patient A sought a second opinion of a consultant at the Nuffield. Both Rowley and Nuffield consultants have discussed the patient who agree the treatment and procedure was unremarkable.
Patient A note in regard the instruction to attend Accident and Emergency, this is standard information when patients contact us describing acute symptoms. We are a small site with no Accident and Emergency, if our team deem a patient needs rapid assessment accident and emergency is the right department to attend. The accident and emergency will refer to us should admission be necessary.
I have received no e-mails from Patient A in relation to these concerns. I am extremely sorry that he feels he has not been communicated with. Had I been aware of his concerns I would have contacted him immediately.
I am very sorry Patient A has been in pain and frustrated. This is not the clinical service we deliver at our facility. Patient A was treated by our top orthopaedic consultant who is thorough and provides exemplary care.
It would be of benefit for me to view the e-mails sent to the facility and when and who Patient A consulted with. I have addressed this with my team who note they have not received correspondence from the patient.
I am very happy to do everything I can to assist in ensuring Patient A is cared for with treatment options available to him.
I look forward to hearing from you.
With kind regards
Sharon Ash GENERAL MANAGER
Reviewer: |
Username: | alan |
Age: | 55-0 |
Location: | stafford |
Gender: | male |
Operation or treatment: | knee arthroscopy |
|
Ratings: |
Outcome of treatment: |
|
Quality of care: |
|
Value for money: |
|
Patient Communication: |
|
Hospital/clinic Environment: |
|
|
Read less