A practice in the Rochdale area

3. Mr and Mrs C complain about the service the Practice gave to Mrs C in 2022 when trying to get confirmation of a diagnosis of premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD is a severe type of premenstrual syndrome or PMS). They also complain the Practice sent them another patient’s information when they asked for Mrs C’s medical records.

4. They said the experience made them less comfortable contacting the Practice. They said the delays in responses, lack of cooperation and unprofessionalism caused them anxiety and stress. They said the Practice’s delayed confirmation of the diagnosis caused delays in other matters they were pursuing, which cost them time and energy.

5. Mr and Mrs C want an independent investigation of the Practice’s service. They want written confirmation from the Practice of Mrs C’s diagnosis and changes to Mrs C’s medical records. They want an explanation of the data breach and an apology.

6. Mrs C went to the Practice in 2022 to get an official diagnosis of PMDD and recognition that she had been wrongly diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Mrs C wanted her medical records amended to reflect this and written confirmation from the Practice of her PMDD diagnosis.

7. PMDD causes a range of emotional and physical symptoms that can be similar to bipolar disorder. PMDD and bipolar disorder are both mood illnesses where the symptoms can repeat in cycles.

8. Mr C said when he asked for information from the Practice about how to get a new diagnosis for Mrs C, the Practice gave confused responses. Mr C said the diagnosis confirmation process was unclear.

9. Mrs C also wanted a letter from the Practice explaining her medical history to support an application for a personal independence payment. Mr C said he made many requests and visits for this information from May to November 2022.

10. Mr C said the Practice’s delays led him to make a freedom of information request. He said after the Practice sent the medical records, he found another patient’s details (a single page from another patient’s record) in Mrs C’s medical records.

11. Mr C said Mrs C’s medical records were incomplete and contained factual errors. Mr C said he wanted the Practice to correct Mrs C’s records but the Practice has been unhelpful and has not done what they asked.

13. Mr and Mrs C wanted several things from the Practice. An apology for the delays and frustration they experienced, an official letter confirming Mrs C’s diagnosis of PMDD, her medical history, amendments to ‘errors’ in Mrs C’s medical records and an investigation into the Practice’s data breach.

14. Before we decide if we should do a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the events complained about had a negative effect that the organisation has not put right. Having done so we have found the Practice has already done enough to put right what happened. It has already done all the things Mr and Mrs C wanted.

15. The Practice wrote to Mr C on 13 September 2023. In this letter it confirmed Mrs C got a diagnosis of PMDD on 27 July 2022 after a consultation with a specialist. The Practice confirmed it had sent a letter to Mrs C about her health on 17 November 2022.

16. The Practice explained why it cannot amend Mrs C’s medical records and offered to record any objections Mrs C has with inaccuracies in her medical record. This is in line with ICO guidance. This explains that the recording of a mistake (for example a diagnosis later found to be wrong) could be an accurate thing to record. In such cases it may be appropriate to record objections next to the information and this is what the Practice has offered to do.

17. The Practice apologised for the data breach. It asked Mr C to return the other patient’s information to allow it to investigate it properly. When we spoke with Mr C he said he had not done this. We advised him to do this to allow the Practice to respond properly. Mr C wanted an investigation into what happened and the Practice has offered to do this.

18. In summary, the Practice has confirmed Mrs C’s diagnosis of PMDD, explained why it cannot amend medical records, explained what it can do and offered to investigate the data breach. It also apologised for their unhappiness with its service. These are all the things they wanted so there is nothing more for us to look into.

19. We recognise getting the PMDD diagnosis has been a frustrating and long process for them.

1. We have carefully considered Mr and Mrs C’s complaint about the service they had from a GP Practice in the Rochdale area (the Practice). We know it has been a frustrating experience for them and it has not been easy dealing with the Practice.

2. We have decided not to look at the complaint further because we have seen no sign that there is anything more for the Practice to put right. We explain our decision below.