Years of pain after a negligent vaccination

M R Law has successfully recovered damages upon behalf of a man who suffered complications following an injection given to him at his GP surgery.

He had visited the practice nurse at the surgery to have his annual flu vaccination but rather than the nurse giving him the injection, a student doctor sitting in on the consultation gave it to him instead. Without waiting for any guidance from the nurse, the trainee doctor immediately injected the patient in the top of his shoulder rather than the arm, causing damage to the shoulder joint.

Following the injection, the patient suffered severe ongoing pain and discomfort in his shoulder, requiring continuing treatment including x-rays, an MRI scan and a number of painkilling injections.

Eventually, the patient made a full recovery from the effects of the incorrectly administered pneumococcal vaccination but not before suffering a couple of years of virtually constant pain and discomfort in his shoulder.

Particularly around this time of year there are recommendations for certain groups of patients to have their annual flu vaccinations and there are great benefits from having the treatment. Robert Barker, head of the Medical Negligence team at M R Law who dealt with the case comments: “It is usually a straightforward procedure to have the injection but sadly, on this occasion unnecessary problems arose. Trainee doctors have to learn and the best way to gain experience is by actually treating patients; however, it is imperative the patient’s welfare is not put at risk at the same time.”

There was an obvious error on the part of the practice and they should have accepted responsibility much earlier. ~Robert Barker

In this instance, by simply waiting for the proper guidance from the nurse on the correct place to administer the injection, our client could have avoided suffering the debilitating symptoms in his shoulder.

The situation was not then helped by the GP practice failing to deal with the claim until our client had commenced court proceedings. “There was an obvious error on the part of the practice and they should have accepted responsibility much earlier,” adds Mr Barker. We were pleased to resolve the claim satisfactorily for our client.

Leave a comment

  • Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.