Flagship superhospital was not what we expected, medical director tells inquiry
The Scottish Hospitals Inquiry is currently investigating the construction of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital campus in Glasgow.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/91283/91283ea548614868c1db1fc691d7f6a0f3316c6e" alt="The medical director of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has been giving evidence to the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry (Andrew Milligan/PA)"
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The medical director of a health board has told a public inquiry that āwe did not get what we expectedā with a flagship hospital at the centre of infection concerns.
The Scottish Hospitals Inquiry heard evidence on Thursday from Dr Jennifer Armstrong, the medical director of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which runs the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QEUH) campus in Glasgow.
The inquiry is currently investigating the construction of the QEUH campus, which includes the Royal Hospital for Children.
It was launched in the wake of deaths linked to infections, including that of 10-year-old Milly Main.
Dr Armstrong said to the inquiry: āI thought we were getting a fantastic hospital, because weāve been working so long for this, but we did not get what we expected.ā
She said she first became aware of issues with the hospital in the middle of 2015.
She said she learned wards intended for adult and child bone marrow patients, and for people with infectious diseases, were not āfit for patientsā, with holes in the walls and no Hepa air filters.
The problems were such that within months of being brought into the QEUH, adult bone marrow patients were moved back to their previous accommodation at the Beatson facility.
Lead counsel to the inquiry Fred Mackintosh KC asked Dr Armstrong whether after learning of the issues she became āsuspicious of whether the project team and/or the contractor had done their jobs properlyā.
He added: āYou were the medical director, and so you could have said: āI want to know what else is wrong.ā
āBecause we do know now that there were problems with the water system and there were problems with the general ventilation, but you didnāt find those out.
āAnd it may be, and Iāll put it out to you that you didnāt ask, and maybe you should have done.ā
She replied that she did not think it was in the āremit of the medical director to look at the areas that youāre talking aboutā.
It is not within the remit of, I believe, any medical director to actually then go into the estates side and be able to ask questions around, 'what was the water system like?'
She continued: āWhen we had problems with the bone marrow transplant units and indeed any other problems that arose, then I was very, very keen on sorting it out as well as keen on the patient safety aspect.
āBut it is not within the remit of, I believe, any medical director to actually then go into the estates side and be able to ask questions around, āwhat was the water system like?ā
āThat is actually the responsibility of the project director, the director of estates and the general management system.ā
She was also asked about her handling of concerns raised on a number of occasions by infection control doctors (ICDs) regarding patient safety in the affected wards.
These included some staff using the hospitalās whistleblowing procedures to escalate concerns around the ventilation and water systems at the hospital that they felt were not being taken seriously by management.
Dr Armstrong accepted those raising concerns had been acting in accordance with the āduties they hold under good medical practiceā and that they were bringing up āgood pointsā.
However she said there were āother ways it could have been dealt with before it reached meā.
She added that while she did not think senior management had been āwithholdingā information from ICDs, she accepted there should have been better systems in place for ācascadingā information to them about the actions the hospital was taking to address the problems they were raising.
She also denied that a meeting she had with whistleblowers in 2017 had been ādifficultā or āintimidatingā, or that at one point during the meeting she had told Dr Christine Peters, who was one of the whistleblowers, she was āhead of nothingā.
She was also asked whether it would have been better if the hospital had been built āin conformity to the guidanceā in the first place, given its Ā£800 million price tag.
She replied: āI think if it would have avoided all the issues that we had, that would have been fantastic, because the stress the patients were put under, particularly the 2A (paediatric bone marrow transplant) patients, was enormous.
āSo absolutely, I think that we should have had that.ā
The inquiry continues.