Claim against GP for missed diagnosis of sepsis after his failure to recognise severity of young man’s condition

Our clinical negligence team has recently settled a claim for a young man following a missed diagnosis of sepsis. He attended his GP, feeling very unwell with back pain to the point of barely being able to walk. In addition to experiencing vomiting and lack of appetite, he was sweating profusely, looked pale and was feeling very weak. It was our client’s case that the GP negligently failed to suspect a systemic illness and to refer him to hospital, instead diagnosing a muscular back sprain and prescribing muscle relaxants.

Our client’s condition deteriorated at home, to the point of near collapse and an ambulance was called for him. The ambulance service’s impression was that he was ‘septic’ and a code yellow sepsis pathway was started. He was rushed to accident and emergency, transferred to intensive care and treated for pneumonia, severe sepsis and multiorgan failure. His family was summoned during the night to come to the hospital due to the severity of his condition, as he was not expected to survive. 

Our client was diagnosed with PVL staph aureus necrotising pneumonia. He was placed in an induced coma and received life-saving ECMO (extra corporeal membrane oxygenation) treatment, renal replacement therapy and mechanical ventilation over a period of approximately four months in hospital. He survived, but has permanently reduced lung capacity, he lost his fingertips and most of his toes resulting in poor balance and reduced manual dexterity, and he also suffered a psychiatric injury. His relationship broke down, leaving him trying to manage living alone, and he was unable to work. 

With the benefit of a very careful investigation, including obtaining diaries that our client’s girlfriend had kept, and witness statements from her and her mother regarding our client’s deterioration, as well as expert liability reports in the fields of general practice, intensive care and microbiology, we were able to bring a claim involving allegations of clinical negligence against the GP. We alleged that the GP failed to realise that our client was systemically unwell, by taking his temperature, pulse and blood pressure. Had that been done, the GP would have been aware that our client had a significantly elevated heart rate and a fever, and given that he was an immunocompromised patient, would have referred him to hospital urgently for further evaluation. If that had happened, initial investigations would have shown significantly raised inflammatory markers and early acute kidney injury. Our client would have been admitted immediately to hospital and treated for sepsis and pneumonia. 

With earlier treatment, he would have made a full recovery after a short period in hospital and would not have needed to spend four months there nor suffer the permanent injuries that actually occurred.

We served a letter of claim putting forward our client’s case but received a letter of response on behalf of the defendant GP denying liability. Nevertheless, as we were confident in the claim and the evidence we had obtained, we started the process of valuing the claim – assessing the nature and extent of our client’s injuries, what care, therapy, and equipment he would require for life, and what his financial losses had and would be. We obtained quantum evidence from experts in the fields of orthopaedics, respiratory medicine, rheumatology, orthotics, care and occupational therapy, and psychiatry. 

After we served those reports on the defendant, the parties agreed to schedule a meeting to explore settlement of the claim. It took some time for that to come to fruition, while the defendant obtained his own quantum evidence and tried to challenge the value of the claim. Despite the fact that the defendant sought to maintain the denial of liability, we were able to reach agreement and the claim was settled at £745,000 in damages plus costs. Alison Johnson, partner in our clinical negligence team, represented the claimant. 

Return to case studies