Settlement of £370,000 due to delayed diagnosis of infection leading to septic arthritis

Our specialist medical negligence team has achieved £370,000 in compensation for a client who suffered a permanent injury to her dominant right wrist due to negligent management of infection.

Our client had given birth to her daughter at Frimley Park Hospital in November 2022. She experienced a minor complication during labour, with some tearing. After initial management and discharge home, she became very unwell with a high temperature and fever. She returned to Frimley Park Hospital with concerning features of infection. After examination in the emergency department, she was reassured that her symptoms were not uncommon following child birth and discharged home.

At home, our client continued to be unwell. She was initially reassured that her symptoms were normal, but after three days her symptoms were not settling and she had noticed a swelling to her dominant right hand/wrist. She re-attended the hospital and investigations revealed that she had a Group A streptococcus infection. She was admitted and treated with antibiotics. The following day she underwent imaging investigations, which confirmed that the infection had travelled to her wrist, and she was diagnosed with septic arthritis. Our client was taken to theatre and underwent surgical debridement to remove the infected soft tissues from her wrist. She remained in hospital for several days on IV antibiotics. During this time, she was unable to care for her newborn daughter.

As a consequence of our client’s septic arthritis, she suffered significant loss of hand and wrist function. She was required to undergo physiotherapy to rehabilitate and strengthen her right wrist. Despite her efforts, our client has been left with a substantial functional deficit. Her right hand and wrist is weak and she is unable to independently perform many normal bi-manual or single-handed activities that are typical in every day life. She has lost independence and will have a much greater reliance on her husband and commercial support, both now and in the future. She has two young children and struggles to care for them in the way that she would like, relying more heavily on her husband. She is able to work, but is at risk of premature retirement and would be compromised on the open labour market because of her wrist injury. The condition of her wrist is not expected to improve.

Due to the impact of the infection on our client’s wrist function, our specialist orthopaedic team were instructed to investigate the standard of care that she received during her initial A&E attendance when she reported symptoms of infection. Supportive evidence was obtained from an expert in emergency medicine, who was of the opinion that infection should have been suspected and investigated. An orthopaedic expert was then instructed, who believed that, with appropriate investigations in the emergency department, infection would have been diagnosed and treated before it spread to her wrist and caused septic arthritis. Our client would not have suffered any injury to her right wrist; she would not have needed wash-out and debridement surgery; she would not have needed rehabilitation; and she would have had no long-term/permanent and functionally limiting symptoms.

After obtaining evidence, allegations of negligence were presented to the defendant. Once the issues had been investigated, the defendant admitted that it was negligent in failing to suspect infection when our client first attended hospital following childbirth and presented with signs indicative of infection. The defendant admitted that its negligent failure to suspect and treat infection caused our client to develop septic arthritis in her dominant wrist.

Following the defendant’s admissions, we obtained evidence from an expert orthopaedic surgeon in relation to our client’s condition and prognosis. Due to the severity and long-term nature of her injury, we quantified our client’s claim to include the additional support that she had received, but also the impact that the loss of wrist function would cause in the future. Our client claimed future losses in relation to her earnings, the need for greater amounts of domestic and commercial care, and for psychological treatment. We sent our claim for compensation to the defendant and ultimately negotiated settlement on our client’s behalf in the amount of £370,000.

Arran Macleod, a senior associate in the medical negligence team, comments: “This case was straightforward on liability – and wasn’t disputed – but had the potential to be complex in relation to the impact of the negligence and the overall value of the claim. Even in cases where negligence is admitted, defendant parties can put up a strong fight to minimise what will be paid in compensation, which can string out and delay achieving a resolution to the claim.

“In this case, we obtained evidence and presented a fair and reasonable claim for compensation; we did not try to exaggerate the impact of the negligence, which can often cause a defendant to dig in their heels and fight harder for a lower compensation payment. The sensible and realistic approach that we took engendered a pragmatic response from the defendant’s solicitor and settlement was achieved without significant argument or delay. The compensation that we achieved for our client was a good reflection of her pain and suffering, as well as the losses she had sustained and the losses that are likely in the future because of the negligently caused injury.”