Easter break office closure 

We will be closed from 5pm Thursday 17 April 2025 until 10am Tuesday 22 April 2025. You can still submit your complaint via our online form but we will not respond until we reopen.

New Customer Service Standards

We have updated our Customer Service Standards and are looking for feedback from customers. Please fill out our survey here by 12 May 2025: https://forms.office.com/e/ZDpjibqe8r 

Decision report 201103869

  • Case ref:
    201103869
  • Date:
    August 2012
  • Body:
    Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board - Acute Services Division
  • Sector:
    Health
  • Outcome:
    Not upheld, no recommendations
  • Subject:
    clinical treatment / diagnosis

Summary

Mrs C complained about her diagnosis and treatment when a suspected pre-cancerous duct was found in her breast after a routine screening. She said that she was offered only radiotherapy after her operation, although she believed alternative treatments were available. Mrs C undertook her own internet research and went to a private doctor for a second opinion. Mrs C said that she was, however, being advised by her clinicians, her GP and even her family to undergo radiotherapy so she eventually signed the consent form and agreed to treatment.

Our investigation showed that several clinicians spoke to Mrs C about her condition and radiotherapy treatment. We took advice from our medical adviser, who said that the only alternative to radiotherapy was no treatment at all. This was because the type of condition that Mrs C had cannot be treated with more usual treatments for breast cancer.

Mrs C was also unhappy with the diagnosis of her condition. She had a mammogram (breast x-ray) and two needle biopsies (where a small amount of tissue is removed for examination). She was also seen by a consultant surgeon. Our medical adviser said that this diagnostic process complied with SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) guidance. He did not consider that the process was overly invasive or radical. In line with the SIGN guidance, the matter was discussed at a multi-disciplinary team meeting and the options discussed with Mrs C and passed on to her GP.

Updated: March 13, 2018