Page Section: Centre Content Column
Failure to refer for endoscopy (15HDC00792)
Download Failure to refer for endoscopy (15HDC00792) (PDF 75Kb)
(15HDC00792, 29 June
General practitioner ~ Medical centre ~ Dysphagia ~
Weight loss ~ Endoscopy ~ Right 4(1)
A 58-year-old man had a regular general practitioner (GP)
at his medical centre, but from time to time consulted another GP
who was employed at the medical centre.
The man presented to the second GP with symptoms of epigastric
pain (which had been present for a month), difficulty swallowing
(dysphagia), increased wind, and weight loss. The GP recorded that
the man's weight was 84 kilograms and that he had not been trying
to lose weight. However, the GP understood that the man's weight
loss was a result of lifestyle changes and was therefore not
unexplained. The GP's working diagnosis was gastritis. She
prescribed the man omeprazole 40 mgs and Metamide 10 mgs, and
arranged blood tests (the results of which were normal).
A few weeks later, the man saw the GP for review and complained
of ongoing difficulty swallowing. The GP did not weigh the man. Her
plan was for the man to continue with his lifestyle changes and to
return if his symptoms continued.
The man next saw the GP approximately two months later. He told
the GP that he had lost a further six kilograms, felt tired and had
continued difficulty swallowing. At this point, the man weighed 78
kilograms. The GP reviewed earlier clinical records and found that
several years earlier the man had weighed 93 kilograms. The GP
ordered repeat blood tests and a chest X-ray (all of which returned
normal results), and formed a "possible plan" to refer the man for
a gastroscopy (a form of endoscopy).
The GP reviewed the man again the following week. The man
complained of gastric pain, burping and general discomfort, and
said he felt as though food was getting stuck in his oesophagus.
The man reported some weight gain. The GP did not weigh the man,
but was reassured by the reported gain. The GP advised the man to
take omeprazole and Metamide together regularly and to return for
further review and for a possible referral for a gastroscopy if he
was not better.
The man consulted his regular GP several months later. He was
referred the same day for an urgent endoscopy and concurrently for
a barium swallow. The next month, the man underwent an
oesophagoscopy (another form of endoscopy), which revealed a
signet-ring carcinoma in his lower oesophagus.
By failing to assess the man appropriately and arrange for him
to be referred urgently for an endoscopy, the second GP failed to
provide services to the man with reasonable care and skill and,
therefore, breached Right 4(1).
The medical centre was found not to have breached the Code.
A number of recommendations were made, including that the second
GP arrange for an independent GP to conduct a qualitative review of
a random selection of 30 patients' consultation notes from the last
12 months and a random audit of 10 referrals to specialist
secondary services the GP had instigated in the same period, and
that the GP provide a written apology to the man.
The second GP was referred to the Director of Proceedings for
the purpose of deciding whether proceedings should be taken. The
Director decided to institute disciplinary proceedings.