Dan underwent a CT scan, which showed a fracture of his spine. This scan was incorrectly reported, and Dan* was discharged without appropriate treatment.
As a result, Dan's fracture was not identified and treated, and he suffered from ongoing neck pain and deterioration in his mobility.
Despite the obstacles presented by the defendant, compensation was secured.
The challenges the client faced
Dan reported to the Accident and Emergency department after an unwitnessed fall. He presented with neck pain and was unable to move his head to the right.
The next day, an MRI scan was requested, which showed the possibility of a right-sided unifocal dislocation and evidence of Grade 2 spondylolisthesis at the C4/C5 region. A CT scan was then requested, which was outsourced to an external radiology company.
The CT scan confirmed the suspicion of right unilateral facet joint dislocation and fracture; however, the findings of the CT scan were never reported, and Dan was discharged.
Dan continued to suffer from neck pain, and there was a continuous deterioration in his mobility. Over a year later, further imaging and investigations revealed the unilateral dislocation sustained as a result of his fall. It was found that Dan had an established cervical spine C4 / 5 right sided facet dislocation. The risks associated with corrective surgery were significantly higher than they would have been had the injury been identified at an earlier stage.
Corrective surgery would have carried greater and longer-lasting risks, such as an inability to swallow or paralysis. As a result, Dan had no option but to forgo surgery.
Dan has suffered a prolonged period of pain; he continues to suffer from neck pain. His mobility has also significantly reduced, so he now requires constant supervision. Dan also requires the use of a mobility scooter.
How we helped settle the claim
Elizabeth Wickson, a senior associate, supported Dan in making a medical negligence claim against the radiology company. Together, they argued that there had been a breach of duty, the defendant failed to report the findings of the CT scan.
The radiology company admitted liability, acknowledging the failure to report the unilateral dislocation. However, they denied responsibility for Dan's ongoing symptoms and instead stated that these were age-related changes.
The defendant continued to deny liability, maintaining that Dan would not have experienced a different outcome if the diagnosis had been made earlier.
The matter became advanced in Court proceedings; however, Elizabeth ensured that clear and compelling evidence was obtained to challenge this position. Elizabeth obtained expert evidence from independent specialists in the relevant fields, namely a consultant orthopaedic surgeon and a specialist spinal surgeon.
As a result of Elizabeth's tenacity and thanks to Dan's trust, a settlement was successfully secured.
*Real name not used
