Campbell Fitzpatrick were instructed to act on behalf of a Patient, now aged 49 years, in this clinical negligence action. The patient attended a physiotherapist in 2004 due to back pain. He underwent treatment, by way of traction. Immediately after that treatment the patient experienced symptomology consistent with neurological impairment. The patient returned to the physiotherapist who instituted further treatment by way of traction. The patient suffered further severe symptoms which required treatment at a local accident and emergency department. The patient was ultimately referred to the Regional Neurology Treatment Centre where he was operated upon for cauda equina syndrome secondary to an L5/S1 disc prolapse. As a result of the treatment provided by the physiotherapist and the by the accident and emergency department of the first hospital, the patient alleged that he had been caused to sustain severe personal injury, loss and damage.
Essentially the patient’s case was that after he had developed neurological symptoms as a consequence of the first traction treatment, the physiotherapist should have referred the patient was urgent treatment instead of undertaking further traction treatment at the time of the second presentation. By the time the patient was seen on the second occasion, he was experiencing very severe pain and complaining of numbness. Campbell Fitzpatrick, Solicitors, acting on behalf of the patient, obtained independent physiotherapy evidence which supported the patient’s proposition that the care which had been provided was inadequate.
Allegations were also raised concerning the treatment at the local accident and emergency department. The patient arrived at the A&E Department early in the morning. He was not transferred to the regional centre for treatment for a period of 12 ½ hours. It was alleged that this delay caused an exacerbation of the patient’s cauda equina syndrome. No criticism was made concerning the treatment received at the regional centre. Indeed the treatment provided there was of the highest standard.
As a consequence of the alleged negligence in this case the patient suffered severe personal injury. He had a very considerable loss of mobility in the aftermath of the treatment. He suffered from numbness in both legs. He continues to suffer from bowel and bladder symptomology associated with a lack of sensation. He has altered sensation and discomfort when sitting. He continues to have constant low back ache which is exacerbated by any attempt to walk any distance. The patient complains of interference with sexual function. He complains of disturbed sensation down the back of his leg on the left side and into the sole of his foot.
Prior to the treatment the Plaintiff was employed as an IT Manager. Approximately 18 months after the occurrence of the injury his employment was terminated on ill-health grounds. The injured party has considerable care needs going into the future which were assessed by a nursing care consultant appointed on his behalf.
The patient instructed Patrick Mullarkey of Campbell Fitzpatrick, Solicitors to act on his behalf. Proceedings were issued in 2006 and ultimately came before the courts in recent times. During the weeks leading up to the hearing of the action, the representatives acting on behalf of the Plaintiff engaged in negotiations in an attempt to narrow the issues between the parties and to agree a settlement of the claim. Ultimately a settlement in the sum of £865,257.31 was agreed. This figure represents compensation in relation to the personal injury loss and suffering endured by the Plaintiff together with payments made in respect of loss of earnings, care, loss of services etc. The case was settled without admission of liability.