Search
Call Us
Enquiry
Menu
SearchCall UsEnquiryMenu
In May 2013, a British Medical Journal (BMJ) study revealed that patients undergoing planned surgery were more likely to suffer fatal clinical negligence during the weekend than at the beginning of the week.
Naturally, many individuals, medical authorities, and organisations – such as the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) – declared that these findings were unacceptable and that people should receive the same level of care from medical professionals throughout the week.
Reportedly, the lack of experienced doctors on duty in hospitals during Saturdays and Sundays impacted the safety of patients undergoing elective surgical procedures.
Furthermore, the lack of consultants available during emergency cases at the weekends meant that those patients were more likely to die than if they had been admitted earlier in the week.
The team which undertook the study – led by a clinical reader in epidemiology and public health at Imperial College London – stated that the risk of a poor outcome to medical treatment increased every day after Monday.
A spokesperson for the research team explained, “Compared with Monday, the adjusted odds of death [taking into account case mix] for all elective surgical procedures was 44% higher, and 82% higher, if the procedures were carried out on Friday or at the weekend respectively.”
The study also found that the chances of patients dying or suffering other clinical negligence-related injuries were higher if having a lung removed, an operation to improve blood-flow to the heart, or surgery for an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
The skill with which operations are undertaken, and the first 48 hours following surgery, are very important to an individual’s recovery, so a lower quality of care during certain days of the week is unacceptable.
Fewer experienced staff could mean that a patient does not receive the care they require to successfully recover from their surgery or the initial injuries caused by their accident or illness.
If you or a member of your family have suffered clinical negligence – which resulted in personal injury or illness – you could be eligible to claim compensation for your pain, suffering, and lost earnings.
4th December 2018
Jonathan Austen-Jones represented the Claimant (“ER”), a 53 years old man who was taken by ambulance to the Royal Sussex County Hospital on 4 March 2017 after suffering with abdominal pain over the previous two days. Continue reading »
RH sought help and advice from Jonathan Austen-Jones to investigate a potential claim for clinical negligence against the Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust following back surgery carried out by one of its orthopaedic and spinal specialists.
Continue reading »
29th November 2018
Gazebos are used by all kinds of organisations when attending events up and down the country. It may not seem that an employer’s duty to assess and minimise workplace risks would extend to tasks such as carrying and assembling gazebos, but a recent case shows that it does. Continue reading »
28th November 2018
In order to succeed in a ‘secondary victim’ claim as a result of clinical negligence it is necessary to establish that the claimant suffered psychiatric illness or injury – as opposed to grief, sorrow, deprivation or the need to provide care for the loved one who has suffered the injury – as a result of witnessing a sudden, shocking event. Given the number of hurdles a claimant has to clear to show that the many tests have been met, there have been very few successful claims to date. Continue reading »
26th November 2018
Two recent cases illustrate that employers need to be vigilant in assessing tripping and slipping hazards in areas where workers perform their tasks. If they fail in this duty, those who are injured as a result may be able to claim compensation. Continue reading »
23rd November 2018
A radical proposal for cycling awareness has been unveiled by the government. The plans include a series of measures to improve safety for vulnerable road users, and to encourage and support cycling. The aim is to reduce the significant number of serious and fatal accidents suffered by cyclists. Continue reading »
24th July 2017
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced measures to tackle fraudulent sickness claims. Fraudulent claims of food poisoning by holidaymakers which are false or exaggerated claims, could result in British tourists paying higher package holiday prices. Continue reading »
27th February 2017
The last revision of the discount rate was undertaken on 25th June 2001, when it was set at 2.5%. From 20th March 2017, the rate drops from 2.5% to minus 0.75%. It is a change of 3.25 percentage points. Continue reading »
21st January 2016
Jonathan Austen-Jones acted on behalf of the applicant in this case who was the subject of sexual abuse at the hands of his step-father between the ages of about 5 and 7.
An initial application for compensation pursuant to the 1990 Scheme was made in 1992 and in June 1996 he was awarded £10,000.00 in respect of the abuse he had suffered. This award was clearly too low and it appears that no psychiatric evidence was before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). Continue reading »
Jonathan Austen-Jones acted on behalf of the claimant in her claim for damages for clinical negligence. The claim arose from the tragic loss of her baby’s life as a consequence of the failure of the Defendant Trust, appreciating that baby B had a Group B streptococcus infection at his birth on the night of the 1st January 2009, resulting in baby B’s death at 00.55 hours on the 3rd January 2009. Continue reading »
