Mr R aged 62 years had been diagnosed with a lymphoma on the right side of his neck. He underwent an excision biopsy and was then referred to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham for radical radiotherapy to the right side of his neck.

Unfortunately, due to an error in interpreting the CT scan and a failure to double check the recommendation for treatment before it was given, radiotherapy was given to the patient’s left side of the neck instead of the right side. The instruction that had been given to the radiotherapy department following a misinterpretation of the CT scan was to give the radiotherapy to the left side of the neck.

Three sessions of radiotherapy to the left side of the neck were given before the mistake was identified. Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham immediately acknowledged the error to Mr R. An internal investigation was conducted. This highlighted the failure to review the decisions that had been made and that had this been done the error in the instruction to give radiotherapy to the left side of the neck would have been found before treatment started.

Mr R was concerned about (a) the long term effect the increased radiation would have and (b) the fact that he suffered with reduced natural saliva production and had to rely on methods to produce saliva artificially and whether the additional radiation given had caused this to be an increased problem. Mr R who was naturally concerned about his original diagnosis of cancer suffered increased anxiety as a consequence of the fact that a mistake had been made and he had been given additional radiation.

Mr R contacted us because of his concerns and we investigated in particular the causation aspects. As a consequence of our investigation Mr R was reassured that because the radiation given in error to the left side of his neck was a very low dose this would have minimal or no long term effect. Mr R had been told by his treating consultant that the problems he was having with his saliva production would “get better”. Mr R found they were not getting better and so we arranged for him to be seen at a local Dental Hospital and saliva production tests were conducted. Mr R was re-assured that whilst he had a reduced saliva production the amount he could produce naturally was sufficient and to assist matters his prescription for the assistance of artificial production was altered. Mr R’s concerns and anxiety were helped by receiving this information.

Following the conclusion of these investigations we approached the Defendants with an offer to settle the claim to compensate for the additional pain and suffering Mr R had due to the 3 sessions of radiotherapy given to the left side of his neck in error and his increased anxiety. The National Health Service Litigation Authority managing the claim on behalf of Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham accepted the offer to settle the claim and compensation was paid.

This claim highlights the fact that a patient’s anxiety is significantly increased when they are the subject of a mistake having been made albeit with minimal effect and that this is not something that should be dismissed or overlooked. The fact that the Defendant was open as to what had happened and what changes were being made to make sure this would not happen again assisted Mr R and the fact that the claim was settled without recourse to the Court and was done within a reasonable period of time.

This claim was handled by Sarah Huntbach, Associate in the Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Department of the firm.