One of Scotland’s leading doctors has said she did not sign off on plans for a children’s ward, telling an inquiry they were promised a like-for-like unit they never got.
Professor Brenda Gibson, a consultant paediatric haematologist, gave evidence to the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry on Monday, which is investigating a series of contamination issues at the £840 million Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow.
Scottish ministers announced the inquiry in the wake of deaths linked to infections at the hospital, including that of 10-year-old Millie Main, who was being treated for cancer at the children’s hospital that is part of the same campus.
The inquiry is also examining problems that led to the delay in the opening of the new Royal Hospital for Children and Young People in Edinburgh.
READ MORE: Scottish Government propose ban on gas boilers in new buildings from next year
Professor Gibson told Alister Duncan KC, the inquiry’s senior counsel, that she she did not sign off on plans because they had not got the hospital they were promised.
The professor, lead of the Schiehallion children’s cancer unit, told the £11 million inquiry that the responsibility for providing a safe environment for patients lies with the health board.
The unit had been based at Yorkhill in the city, and plans were drawn up for it to be moved. Prof Gibson said there had been “very limited consultation”.
“All that I remember we had as choices was there was a floor plan, and that was to be our space, and we were not to have any more space than that,” the inquiry heard.
“We could do anything related to that space, but if it didn’t meet our needs, it couldn’t be extended. So we just had to make the most of that space and we opted to maximise the number of patient cubicles.”
It meant at the new hospital, she told the inquiry, they had to “sacrifice” much of what had been at the old unit in order to fit patients to avoid them being sent to other wards and, as a result lost office space, parent accommodation, a staff room, a seminar room, and pharmacy accommodation.
“I, as the lead, was asked to sign off the plan and I didn’t do it. Well, I didn’t do it to the best of my knowledge. I certainly held out for a very long time,” she said.
“I think it was signed off by a senior nurse, a managerial nurse. That’s my understanding.”
And, the inquiry heard: “We had been promised a like-for-like unit in a flagship hospital and it certainly wasn’t a like-for-like unit.”
Contamination issues have been linked with water quality and ventilation systems in the super-hospital, which opened in April 2015.
Prof Gibson told the hearing, which is being overseen by inquiry chairman Lord Brodie, she had no involvement with ventilation or water systems, and their involvement was “purely in deciding how we would allocate the space”.
During the hearing, Prof Gibson said it was the view of clinicians that they were “responsible for providing chemotherapy or any other form of care within national or international protocols or guidelines, and to do that with a well-trained workforce within a holistic manner”.
She added: “The responsibility for providing a safe environment for that treatment to be delivered lies, within our view, with the health board led by the chief executive.
“The responsibility for deciding is a place safe or not safe, lies with control of infection.”
Upon moving into the hospital, the inquiry heard, there were sewage leaks, cladding issues, and windows falling out.
The inquiry also heard there were issues with temperature, blinds, televisions not working, and also issues with the smell of a nearby sewage treatment works.
Prof Gibson is the lead clinician for the haematology and oncology service based in the Royal Hospital for Children in Glasgow.
The inquiry continues.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here