£50,000 for patient misdiagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Posted 06/12/2013

Ben Ward, a medical injury solicitor at Ashtons Legal, has obtained £50,000 in damages for Ms H, a 41 year old woman, for being misdiagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis between 2003 and 2011. The misdiagnosis resulted in Ms H undergoing intense treatment with disease modifying therapy throughout this period.In June 2003 Ms H was diagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis. She was initially prescribed Sulphasalazine but stopped taking it due to severe nausea and headaches. At a further review on 22 August 2003, she was prescribed Methotrexate. She continued to use Methotrexate for a number of years despite suffering mild depression, loss of libido and a general loss of interest in most daily activities.In 2007, due to suffering on-going side effects, Ms H’s treatment was switched to Leflunomide. She suffered severe mouth ulcers, gastric reflux, nausea and headaches as a reaction to the medication. Up until 14 January 2011, she continued to receive different combinations of disease modifying therapy including Gold injections, Hydroxychloroquine, Cyclosporine and Azathioprine.In 2008, due to her on-going treatment regime and intolerable side-effects, Ms H chose to take voluntary redundancy from her position as a logistics manager. Instead she chose to re-train in an administrative position and later became employed as an assistant with the DWP. With it she took a large salary reduction.On seeking a second opinion from a separate Trust in January 2011, Ms H was informed that she did not, nor had she ever, suffered from Rheumatoid Arthritis and a diagnosis of Fibromyalgia was made.Ben Ward comments: “The real tragedy of this case is that Ms H had to live day in day out for eight years with horrendous side effects from this medication. The realisation that this was all unnecessary is incredibly difficult to comprehend. Ms H would often say that she felt her best years had been wasted. Throughout her 30s she had envisaged that she would progress in her career, buy her own home, perhaps start a family. However, none of this was possible”.On completion of the case Ms H wrote to Ben thanking him for getting to know and understand her lifestyle and ensuring she always felt relaxed, important and comfortable. She explained that she was dubious about instructing an ‘injury lawyer’ but that it soon became obvious to her that not all injury lawyers are the same.