The story
We recently settled a claim for a client who had unnecessary surgery on her spine when she was just 17. She developed lower back pain at around the age of 14 and spinal fusion surgery was recommended. This involves joining two (or more) of your vertebrae together using bone grafts, screws and rods to help make your spine stronger and/or more stable. It is a major operation and in our client’s case it involved taking a hip graft. The surgery failed and she had to have a second spinal operation.
The details
Our client initially went to her GP with lower back pain when she was 14, and she was referred to undergo physiotherapy and an MRI scan. There was some back and forth between services regarding who would be providing the physiotherapy due to her age, and at the time she was referred to a spinal surgeon a few months later, it seemed to have been overlooked that she had only actually undergone physiotherapy assessment. She had not been given any real physiotherapy treatment, nor were other conservative measures discussed with her or her mother.
She saw the spinal surgeon again six months later and her lower back pain was still the same, so she was put on the waiting list for surgery. Her mother had to give consent due to her age and because she was advised her daughter’s back pain might get worse to the point it could affect her mobility, she agreed to the surgery.
Despite being on the waiting list for surgery for over two years after that, no steps were taken to ensure our client had undergone physiotherapy first to try and improve her symptoms, or even other more invasive but non-surgical treatment, such as pain management injections. In fact, she did not see the surgeon again until the day of her operation, when she was 17 years old. After surgery, her back pain was worse than it had been before. She was eventually referred to another spinal surgeon and underwent revision surgery because the initial operation had failed.
The impact
Following the surgeries our client was left with significant scarring from the two operations, as well as residual back pain. The experience also had a significant impact on her mental health.
How we helped
Our client and her mother sought legal advice and instructed Shoosmiths to investigate the care provided to her by the spinal surgeon who performed the initial spinal fusion surgery, and to understand why the surgery failed.
Pam Westwood, senior associate, acted for our client and expert evidence was obtained from an orthopaedic spinal surgeon to prove whether there had been any breach of duty in undertaking the spinal fusion surgery, and whether the operation itself had been performed negligently, resulting in the need for a second operation.
Our client had lytic spondylolisthesis of the L5 / S1 which was diagnosed when she was aged just 14. Whilst she initially presented with lower back pain and some leg pain, by the time she first saw the spinal surgeon, the leg pain had resolved. We were able to show that our client had not been fully informed about all treatment options before she was consented for surgery. At the very least, there should have been a discussion with her and her mother about conservative measures, such as a proper course of physiotherapy and pain management injections before surgery was considered at such a young age. Our client and her mother would not have agreed to surgery without first exploring the non-surgical options had she been given the right advice, and all reasonable alternative treatment options had been properly discussed with her.
Whilst there was no negligence in relation to the spinal fusion surgery itself, the case settled before court proceedings were issued on the basis that our client was not properly consented for the spinal fusion surgery, and she would therefore also have avoided the need for the revision surgery.
Pam Westwood comments;
“I’m delighted to have secured a settlement for this young lady, who should never have had major surgery on her spine. Around four percent of women have this type of back condition, and the vast majority don’t need surgery. It should be a last resort when other treatments haven’t worked and there has been a full and frank discussion with the patient, and they have been appropriately consented before surgery. Something which was clearly lacking in our client’s case.
There was a somewhat misinformed presumption that our client had undergone physiotherapy and a complete disregard for her other treatment options, including the option of not having any treatment at all. It’s likely she would not have needed surgery, particularly given her age. Not only did she have two major spinal procedures, but there was a significant impact on her mental health too.”
Disclaimer
This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is recommended that specific professional advice is sought before acting on any of the information given. © Shoosmiths LLP 2024
