NHS Borders has apologised for its care and treatment “failings” after a complaint was upheld by an ombudsman.

The complainant, referred to as C in the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) decision report, raised concerns about the care and treatment their late parent, ‘A’, received at A&E.

C complained that the medical team had failed to recognise the nature and severity of A’s condition and their general vulnerability, that they failed to institute an appropriate and timely treatment plan and that there was a failure in record keeping.

They also complained that A was discharged home without appropriate medication, without an appropriate discharge letter and without alerting their family, according to the SPSO.

A spokesperson for the ombudsman said: “When responding to C’s complaint, the board accepted that there were failings in relation to some aspects of A’s care and treatment. They apologised that C had not been informed about A being discharged. They explained that this had been shared with relevant staff and that they were making changes to ensure families and carers were contacted prior to the patient being discharged.

“The board also accepted that A should have been provided with a copy of their discharge letter given their vulnerability. They explained that consideration would be given to printing off discharge letters and giving them to medical patients in certain circumstances.

“Further, the board accepted that there had been failings in relation to record keeping and in relation to A’s medical notes. They indicated that this would be brought to the attention of the relevant staff, would be part of the medical induction and would be discussed in a clinical forum.

“We took independent advice from a consultant in emergency medicine. We found that the care and treatment given to A whilst in A&E was reasonable as was the decision to discharge A.

“There was no evidence to suggest that A’s death was linked to any aspect of the care and treatment they received in A&E.

“However, we found that, in addition to the failings identified by the board that are detailed above, there was no evidence that the board had any process in place to examine this type of case to ascertain whether it met the threshold for a Significant Adverse Event Review (SAER). We upheld the complaint.

“We also found that there was a failure by the board to fully address the issues raised when responding to C’s complaint and that there were undue delays in updating C and responding to them about their complaint.”

Following the publication of the decision report, an NHS Borders spokesperson said: “We have expressed our sincere apologies to C and their family and have accepted the recommendations identified by the SPSO.”