Pryers helped a client, *Sarah*, to get compensation after suffering an allergic reaction to antibiotics.
An allergic reaction to antibiotics used to treat tonsillitis
In May 2008 Sarah attended her GP as she was suffering a sore throat. It was suspected that she had tonsillitis and was prescribed erythromycin.
The following day she had developed a rash on her hands and feet so she returned to see the practice nurse. She was advised to stop taking the antibiotics. Over the next few days the rash disappeared.
In November 2008 Sarah was suffering another sore throat so went back to her GP. She was given erythromycin once more, despite informing her GP that she had previously had a reaction to that medication. She was told to return if she had any problems.
The following day she developed a rash with blisters and pus over her arms and legs. She saw a different GP who told her to stop taking erythromycin and prescribed another antibiotic.
One day later the rash had got worse so Sarah attended her local Accident and Emergency department. Sarah was advised that the rash was due to an adverse reaction to erythromycin and she should stop taking all medication.
Sarah returned four days later and it was noted that she had made some improvement but continued to have some superficial scarring. In total it took approximately three weeks for the rash to subside.
How Pryers helped Sarah to get compensation
After investigations allegations were put to the defendant who responded to say that the majority of GPs would not review previous records and therefore Sarah’s GP had not acted negligently. Expert evidence was obtained which advised that all GPs have a duty to review past medication and any recorded adverse reactions and therefore there was a clear breach of the GPs duty of care.
The arguments from the expert were put to the defendant along with an offer of £2,000 to settle the case. The Defendant made a counter offer of £500 and the case was finally settled for £1,250, which Sarah was pleased to accept along with the Defendant paying all of her legal costs so she kept 100% of her compensation.