The Claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained as a result of delays in diagnosing spinal cord compression on 04.09.15 and 18.09.15.  She was referred for physiotherapy treatment having developed back pain and loss of sensation in the calf and base of her foot in August 2015 and on 04.09.15 attended A&E on the advice of her physiotherapist after she described symptoms potentially represented bladder retention.  She was discharged from A&E without any orthopaedic assessment or an MRI scan despite the out-of-hours GP noting she had reduced perineal sensation, a clear red flag sign of cauda equina syndrome.  Over the next couple of weeks, the Claimant’s symptoms continued and worsened, and she attended A&E at the same hospital once more on 18 September but was again discharged without an MRI scan on the basis that her symptoms were unlikely to represent cauda equina syndrome.

A week later, the Claimant underwent an MRI scan having been referred by her GP and, once this was reviewed by a neurosurgeon, it was concluded that she had impending, if not actual, cauda equina and was admitted for urgent surgery.

The Claimant sued the Hospital Trust for wrongly advising the Claimant that she did not need an orthopaedic review and an urgent MRI at her first attendance and for not investigating her symptoms further on the second attendance and arranging an MRI scan.

As the Hospital Trust would not admit that the out– of- hours GP had reported the symptoms complained of to them, it was necessary for the Claimant to sue the out-of-hours GP as well in relation to the first attendance at hospital.

The Claimant suffered persisting back pain, neuropathic pain in her leg, saddle area numbness, weakness of the left leg, reduced sexual sensation and difficulties with voiding urine and urinary incontinence during intercourse. Her claim was that, had an urgent MRI scan been performed following either her attendance at hospital on 04.09.15 or 18.09.15, she would have undergone surgery and avoided all or most of the aforementioned symptoms.

After 6 years of litigation, the Hospital Trust finally admitted that they were responsible for the Claimant’s treatment, and that it was substandard care not to refer the Claimant for orthopaedic assessment and MRI scan.  However, it was not admitted that any MRI scan would have been positive for cauda equina syndrome and that she would have required urgent surgery. The Hospital Trust maintained that earlier surgery would not have altered the Claimant’s outcome in any way and that the symptoms she had both before and following surgery were of severe sciatica not cauda equina syndrome.

Medical reports were obtained from experts in the disciplines of neurosurgery, urology, radiology and pain management, and, despite the Trust  maintaining that the Claimant had suffered no or very modest injury from the admitted breach of duty, Moosa-Duke Solicitors were able to achieve a six figure settlement and a representative of the Trust was on hand at the settlement meeting to offer an apology on behalf of the Trust for the failure in recognising the symptoms of cauda equina syndrome and have indicated their willingness to engage with the Claimant to confirm the actions taken to reduce the risk of this happening again to other patients in the future.

Moosa-Duke Solicitors are an experienced team of specialist clinical negligence solicitors.  Please call us for a no obligation discussion on 0116 254 7456 or email us at enquiries@moosaduke.com if you have concerns about a delay in diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome.