NHS in England Partly Upheld Search on PHSO website

North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust

P-001578 · Report · Decision date: 26 October 2022 · View North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust scorecard
Complaint (AI summary)
The complainant alleged her sister was discharged with inadequate pain management despite a fracture and experienced poor communication from the Trust.
Outcome (AI summary)
The complaint was partly upheld regarding inadequate pain management and subsequent distress. The ombudsman found failings in the Trust's handling of Mrs B's pain.

Full decision details

The Complaint

6. Mrs A complains on behalf of Mrs B, who was admitted to the Trust on 19 October 2020 after a fall at home. Mrs A complains that the Trust confirmed there were no fractures, and her sister was discharged on 31 October, but then readmitted the next day and a fracture was found. Mrs A complains that there were problems with Mrs B’s care during the first admission to hospital and that she was discharged while still experiencing pain and confusion.

7. Mrs A also complains the Trust did not contact her as next of kin.

8. Mrs A says when Mrs B was readmitted the Trust found her hip was fractured. The fracture caused Mrs B pain and distress, and she is still not fully mobile. Mrs A also says Mrs B was distressed, confused and in pain when discharged, which caused Mrs A anxiety and worry.

9. Mrs A says she was also distressed by a lack of communication with her family.

10. Mrs A is looking for recognition of mistakes and improvements in patient care and treatment.

Background

11. On 19 October 2020, Mrs B, who is elderly, had a fall at home. She was admitted to hospital and CT and X-ray images were taken. These did not find any fractures, although she was unable to bear weight on her leg and complained of hip pain.

12. On 22 October 2020, Mrs B had a mini-mental state examination. The Trust admits it did not do this test again when Mrs B left the ward on the 29 October, and it should have.

13. The Trust says Mrs B reported no pain and appeared alert before being discharged on 31 October 2020.

14. On 1 November 2020 Mrs B returned to hospital with pain in the right side of her hip and appeared confused. An X-ray showed a fracture of Mrs B’s right hip.

Findings

Mrs B’s confusion and pain when discharged

18. When a patient no longer needs to be in hospital for treatment, it is appropriate to discharge them. This is set out by NHS England in its Frailty Toolkit and the Department of Health and Social Care guidance, as referenced above.

19. Mrs A tells us that because of Mrs B’s condition, she should not have been discharged. We have carefully considered the clinical records and independent advice from our advisers.

20. The first scans show no injury that needed treatment, but the day after being discharged Mrs B was readmitted due to pain in her hip. The medical records show that the clinical team believed there was no need for any specific treatment, due to the X-ray and CT results.

21. Mrs B’s admission was during the coronavirus pandemic. The Trust used the COVID-19 discharge guidance to make beds available and give support at home if needed. The guidance says, ‘acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so.’

22. We understand from our physician adviser that the Trust did the right scans when Mrs B was admitted. Our radiology adviser confirmed that no fracture can be seen on the images. The medical records show that the staff believed Mrs B was clinically fit, which was supported by the X-ray and CT scan, and staff had not seen any evidence of confusion. Discharging Mrs B because she was clinically fit, and not in need of any physical care at that time, would be in line with policy and guidance.

23. However, we also know that Mrs B was in pain and expressed this throughout her admission.

24. While Mrs B’s medical records show that there were frequent reviews, there is no evidence of staff examining her leg during admission. There is evidence throughout Mrs B’s admission that she complained about pain in her hip and leg, but there is no evidence of any further attempt to diagnose the cause of the pain. The Trust’s final response recognised Mrs B’s pain and says staff managed this with pain relief. Although the Trust recognised Mrs B’s pain, in our view, not enough was done to investigate the cause of it.

25. The Trust’s final response says that Mrs B’s pain improved during her stay in hospital. However, the clinical records from the physiotherapist and the nurse say her pain was still severe. GMC Good Medical Practice says:

‘You must provide a good standard of practice and care. If you assess, diagnose, or treat patients, you must:

adequately assess the patient’s conditions, taking account of their history (including the symptoms and psychological, spiritual, social, and cultural factors), their views and values; where necessary, examine the patient’

and

‘In providing clinical care you must:

d. take all possible steps to alleviate pain and distress whether a cure may be possible.’

26. The Trust did not make good enough attempts to assess or diagnose the cause of Mrs B’s pain, in line with GMC guidelines. If there had been a more complete assessment from the medical team, it may have meant more scans and an earlier diagnosis of the fracture. This may have led to more treatment sooner and improved Mrs B’s pain as well as mobility. This could also have affected the decision to discharge her, but we cannot say for sure.

27. Mrs A says Mrs B may have fallen while on the ward, but this was not recorded in her medical records. As Mrs B was admitted with pain in her hip and leg and she told staff about this, it is unlikely that she fell again and suffered a new injury. We do not have any other evidence to look into whether anything else could have caused her pain.

28. There was a failure to fully consider and investigate the cause of Mrs B’s hip pain. Considering the information from Mrs A and the Trust, the Trust did not act in line with the relevant standards and guidance by not assessing Mrs B’s pain further.

29. Having seen evidence that something went wrong, we next considered what, if any, impact this had. Mrs B stayed in pain, had to be readmitted the next day and was later diagnosed with a fracture in her hip. We note that it was only a very short period before she returned to the Trust’s care.

30. The Trust’s actions caused Mrs A avoidable worry, as she witnessed Mrs B in pain when discharged and had to get emergency assistance the next day. We recommend the Trust puts right the worry and distress she experienced.

The Trust’s communication

31. Mrs A says the Trust was poor at communicating with her and updating on her Mrs B’s progress during admission. She says this caused worry and distress for the family, especially not having any updates on Mrs B’s recovery.

32. In its final response letter, the Trust apologised and explained it has introduced a new way of communicating with a patient’s next of kin. The Trust has given us information showing what it has done since November 2020 to improve communication with the relatives of patients.

33. Mrs B was admitted to hospital during the pandemic, and restrictions made it especially difficult to communicate with families and visit loved ones. We fully recognise this. Although we appreciate the difficulties faced by the NHS and its staff during this period, GMC guidance says:

‘You must be considerate to those close to the patient and be sensitive and responsive in giving them information and support’.

34. The guidance shows that consideration should be given to patients’ friends and family members. The evidence available to us suggests the Trust did not act in line with the GMC guidance.

35. The clinical records show the Trust did contact Mrs A during Mrs B’s admission. However, we understand from her point of view this communication was not effective and Mrs A was worried and upset.

36. We thought about what the Trust has done to put right the worry caused to Mrs A. The Trust has recognised her concerns, apologised, and explained how it has learned from her complaint. The Trust has taken on board Mrs A’s feedback and provided us with details of its improvements. This is in line with our Principles of Good Complaint Handling which say, ‘public bodies should ensure that all feedback and lessons learnt from complaints contribute to service improvement’.

37. We understand Mrs A is frustrated. She told us the family felt there had been a lack of communication before, when another family member was under the Trust’s care. She feels nothing has improved since the family’s last experience.

38. The Trust’s evidence shows it has a rolling programme with the aim to train all staff, from July 2021. This may explain why Mrs A did not feel like she had seen any improvement, as the planned changes were still in the process of being completed.

39. We consider the Trust has taken steps to put things right for Mrs A. We do not uphold this part of the complaint.

40. This in line with our principles which say: ‘Where a public body has failed to get it right and this has led to injustice or hardship, it should take steps to put things right. That means, if possible, returning complainants and, where appropriate, others who have suffered the same injustice or hardship as a result of the same maladministration or poor service, to the position they were in before this took place’.

Our Decision

1. We have carefully considered Mrs A’s complaint about the Trust. We are sorry to learn the reasons for Mrs A’s complaint, and of the distress and worry she experienced while her sister, Mrs B, was under the care of the Trust.

2. We have identified failings in the Trust’s handling of Mrs B’s pain management throughout her admission. Mrs B was discharged but readmitted to hospital the following day with pain in the same area. It was later found she had a fracture.

3. Mrs A became concerned and worried for Mrs B’s wellbeing when she was discharged from the Trust in pain and confused, but then readmitted the following day with the same symptoms. The Trust responded to Mrs A’s complaint, but we do not think it has done enough to put things right. We uphold this part of the complaint.

4. We recommend the Trust apologise and recognise the distress and frustration caused by its actions. We also recommend the Trust use Mrs B’s case to learn from its mistakes and improve its services.

5. Mrs A says she also experienced distress due to the Trust’s lack of communication while Mrs B was under its care. We can see the Trust has done enough to put things right and we do not uphold this part of the complaint.

Recommendations

41. In considering our recommendations, we have referred to our ‘Principles for Remedy’. These state that where poor service or maladministration (fault) has led to injustice or hardship, the organisation responsible should take steps to put things right.

42. We recommend the Trust recognise the failing we have found in not fully exploring the cause of Mrs B’s pain before her discharge and apologise to Mrs A for the distress and frustration this caused.

43. We also recommend the Trust use Mrs B’s case to learn from its mistakes and make sure in future cases, causes of pain are explored before a patient is discharged. The Trust could do this by professional learning and feedback, making an action plan, or any other suitable action which shows the Trust has taken steps to stop the problem happening again.

Other Decisions About North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust

P-004758 · 30 Jan 2026
Miss O complains about aspects of care and treatment she received from the Trust during the birth of her child.
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004330 · 25 Nov 2025
Ms B complains North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust did not appropriately manage her sister’s involvement in two research trials …
Partly Upheld
P-004001 · 22 Sep 2025
Miss H says the Trust misdiagnosed her mother with COPD rather than identifying a stent blockage and missed a report …
Not Upheld
P-003680 · 24 Jul 2025
Miss X complains the Trust's treatment from October 2023 to April 2024. She says staff were dishonest, they did not …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-003709 · 9 Jul 2025
Mrs B says the Trust discharged her husband without referring him to the oncology department for further investigation and treatment.
Partly Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation →