Estate of deceased woman in her 50s awarded six-figure settlement for failure to diagnose leukaemia

We have acted in a claim on behalf of the estate and dependents of the claimant’s late wife in respect of clinical negligence arising out of the care afforded to her by a GP surgery in North Buckinghamshire.

The deceased died as a result of a catastrophic brain haemorrhage, arising from previously undiagnosed acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APML). She was survived by her husband and their three adult children. The claim was brought under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.

Prior to the brain haemorrhage, the deceased had tried to obtain a GP appointment on two occasions, but on each occasion was simply told by the receptionist that no appointments were available and did not explain how she might obtain a routine appointment.

After supportive expert evidence was obtained from a GP and a haematologist, a letter of claim was served which alleged that there was a failure to provide the deceased with a GP appointment when she contacted the surgery with alarming symptoms, which included extensive unexplained bleeding and bruising.

It was subsequently admitted by the defendant that had appropriate care been provided to the deceased when she contacted the GP surgery, steps would have been taken that would have led to the diagnosis of APML. This would have been in time for treatment to have commenced, which would have prevented her deterioration and death on the balance of probabilities.

We proceeded to quantify the claim, which was complicated in respect of the claimant’s loss of services dependency on his wife, as he was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease shortly after her death. The claim was settled for a six-figure sum, which included a claim for commercial paid care for the claimant with his advancing illness – care which otherwise would have been provided gratuitously by his wife.

As well as needing to have financial security to fund paid care for his advancing illness, a key motivation for the claimant was to raise awareness at the surgery and NHS Resolution about the catastrophic failures here, with the view to improving the quality of services going forward. The claimant would like to see recommendations being made to GP practices to address:

• mandatory call handling training for receptionists, including identifying sudden medical changes that should at least be explored during a call back by a GP;
• GPs to set aside some time to follow up anything new/serious that is flagged by receptionists and for them to be able to arrange fast track diagnostic tests;
• recognition that at times of extreme stress (ie a pandemic) the healthcare system should redouble its efforts to manage everyday health issues as well as managing any crisis, by, for example, bringing in extra locum medical practitioners;
• recording of all phone calls involving patients or people calling on their behalf;
• publication of a patient complaints process including escalation.

Commenting on this case, senior associate Lucie Prothero, who specialises in fatal claims and oncology cases, said: “This was a very sad case, which saw the avoidable death of a woman in her fifties who was looking forward to the next chapter of becoming a grandparent and enjoying retirement with her husband. The claim showed the worrying reliance being placed upon GP receptionists to make value judgements about the ‘seriousness’ or ‘urgency’ of one patient’s clinical condition over another. It also demonstrates how the pressures on GP services, the chronic shortage of GPs in this country, and the difficulties in getting to see a GP face-to-face, can have catastrophic consequences.”