Hi all,  Sorry this is another RIDDOR related query and apologies if this has taxed your collective minds before but here goes with the basics.  I'm aware of RIDDOR wording and HSE guidance - I just want your interpretations on the following scenario as to reportability.

Injured person is a non-employee (a child)

Accident is work related

They are taken from the scene directly to hospital

Injury is a 5mm cut on finger.

They've been taken to hospital not for treatment of their injury which was being dealt with by staff but to pacify, imho, the hysterical mother who was causing much more disturbance to everyone else, so staff took the initiative to try and calm things down

They have the wound washed and a Sterisrip applied whilst at hospital

Question - as they didn't go to hospital for treatment to their injury but still had some treatment when there (if you call having a steristrip applied as 'treatment') does this count as reportable under RIDDOR?

Many thanks for your considerations

I concur, not RIDDOR reportable. I would count the washing and application of the dressing as an examination, not treatment.

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I stand corrected. I suppose I am letting my own bias get in the way here. But yes I can agree that a strip and wash is a treatment. If what the IP states is accurate then it probably is a waste of RIDDOR time, but that is not ours to decide.

Originally Posted by: wjp62

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is then taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I think you will find that the definition is in the wording " is taken from the site to hospital for treatment"

If they are sent/taken to hospital to be checked over after recieving first aid or attedance by a paramedic, NOT reportable even if further treatment is administered at A&E. If they are sent/taken to hospital specifically to recieve further treatment, YES it is reportable.  

Care Homes deal with such cases on a regular basis

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548

Originally Posted by: wjp62

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is then taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I think you will find that the definition is in the wording " is taken from the site to hospital for treatment"

If they are sent/taken to hospital to be checked over after recieving first aid or attedance by a paramedic, NOT reportable even if further treatment is administered at A&E. If they are sent/taken to hospital specifically to recieve further treatment, YES it is reportable.  

Care Homes deal with such cases on a regular basis

So, if a resident, let's say in a Care Home, has an accident (deemed work related i.e. being moved from a sofa to a wheel chair by staff). The accident results in a cut to his leg when he knocks it against the footplate. The on site nurse dresses it, however he is taken directly to hospital to get the injury checked in case stitches are needed. 

At the hospital it is decided stitces aren't needed but the wound is redressed. Is this a RIDDOR ?  

Originally Posted by: jwk

Originally Posted by: Monopoly

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548

Originally Posted by: wjp62

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is then taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I think you will find that the definition is in the wording " is taken from the site to hospital for treatment"

If they are sent/taken to hospital to be checked over after recieving first aid or attedance by a paramedic, NOT reportable even if further treatment is administered at A&E. If they are sent/taken to hospital specifically to recieve further treatment, YES it is reportable.  

Care Homes deal with such cases on a regular basis

So, if a resident, let's say in a Care Home, has an accident (deemed work related i.e. being moved from a sofa to a wheel chair by staff). The accident results in a cut to his leg when he knocks it against the footplate. The on site nurse dresses it, however he is taken directly to hospital to get the injury checked in case stitches are needed. 

At the hospital it is decided stitces aren't needed but the wound is redressed. Is this a RIDDOR ?  

Dressing a wound is treatment; if the Nurse in the care home is regarded in this case as a first-aider it gets a bit clearer. But bearing in mind that since an injury requiring a visit to hospital should be reported to CQC, and CQC is the regulator for H&S in care establishments, its a bit of a moot point really,

John

Any accident in a residential care home, whether the IP is a resident or a member of staff, should be reported to the HSE if it qualifies as a RIDDOR.

Originally Posted by: Monopoly

Originally Posted by: jwk

Originally Posted by: Monopoly

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548

Originally Posted by: wjp62

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is then taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I think you will find that the definition is in the wording " is taken from the site to hospital for treatment"

If they are sent/taken to hospital to be checked over after recieving first aid or attedance by a paramedic, NOT reportable even if further treatment is administered at A&E. If they are sent/taken to hospital specifically to recieve further treatment, YES it is reportable.  

Care Homes deal with such cases on a regular basis

So, if a resident, let's say in a Care Home, has an accident (deemed work related i.e. being moved from a sofa to a wheel chair by staff). The accident results in a cut to his leg when he knocks it against the footplate. The on site nurse dresses it, however he is taken directly to hospital to get the injury checked in case stitches are needed. 

At the hospital it is decided stitces aren't needed but the wound is redressed. Is this a RIDDOR ?  

Dressing a wound is treatment; if the Nurse in the care home is regarded in this case as a first-aider it gets a bit clearer. But bearing in mind that since an injury requiring a visit to hospital should be reported to CQC, and CQC is the regulator for H&S in care establishments, its a bit of a moot point really,

John

Any accident in a residential care home, whether the IP is a resident or a member of staff, should be reported to the HSE if it qualifies as a RIDDOR.

It gets reported to the Incident Contact Centre, if it's an injury to a service user its CQC who will come knocking in the first instance. They may call in HSE if they need the expertise, but it goes to CQC in the first instance,

John

Originally Posted by: Hsquared14

Isn't the care home scenario a bit of a red herring?

The definition in the RIDDOR guidance is so wide you could drive a coach and horses through it - treatment can be interpreted in any number of ways.  But if all that they did was remove a plaster applied by one of your staff and then put another dressing on it (with or without a steristrip) then I personally wouldn't count that as treatment, its investigation.  However, does it really matter if you report it under RIDDOR anyway?  HSE are not going to prosecute over a 5mm cut to a finger and if you report it you have a bit of a comfort blanket that you have done everything that was reasonable / gone the extra mile?  Finally and probably not very helpfully I think it comes down to your personal view of the incident and also to some extent what is the norm in your industy.

In the words of the great D.W.A.Y.N.E Love, 'Mebbe yes, mebbe no'. But probably no, it's not a red herring, this is exactly the sort of scenario where RIDDOR gets even more complicated than it usually is. Hospitals are even worse. Consider this: a person attends A&E for an injury to their hand; while awaiting triage they go to the loo, trip over a thoughtlessly positioned porter's trolley and break a leg. They are not 'taken to hospital for treatment' because they are already at hospital... Now this scenario has been determined to be reportable, but it's not in keeping with the wording of the regulation.

Agree that HSE might not be interested in the IP's scenario, but since they wouldn't investigate that doesn't matter. CQC are the enforcer for injuries to service users in health and social care, and they might be interested, depending,

John

Yes, definitely reportable. Anyway where's the harm in reporting?

Originally Posted by: Invictus

Originally Posted by: jwk

Originally Posted by: Monopoly

Originally Posted by: jwk

Originally Posted by: Monopoly

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548

Originally Posted by: wjp62

I would say all three criteria were met and as such this would be reportable, nowhere in RIDDOR does it state a plaster/steri-strips wouldn’t be classed as treatment, in fact a Q&A found referring to this very subject states:

"RIDDOR 2013, regulation 5 (a) requires the responsible person to notify the enforcing authority (subject to regulations 14 and 15) ‘Where any person not at work, as a result of a work-related accident, suffers an injury, and that person is then taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury’.

HSE response: We asked our Legal Adviser’s Office to advise on the definition of treatment in this context. Their advice is that ‘treatment’ in the RIDDOR context is deliberately broad. As such, it could include a plaster or ointment being applied – so long as that ‘treatment’ took place at a hospital, and was applied, in effect, ‘by the hospital’ insofar as it followed the intervention of a trained medical professional.

Therefore, if a nurse applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, then it would constitute treatment for the purposes of the relevant RIDDOR provision. But if someone was taken to hospital and then sent away without anything being done to them, but who themselves applied a plaster or ointment at the hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

This is because they would not have been ‘taken to the hospital for treatment’ as the ‘treatment and ‘hospital’ elements would in effect be unrelated.

Similarly if this treatment was applied by a trained medical professional at a GP practice, rather than at a hospital, it would not be RIDDOR reportable.

Examinations and diagnostic tests e.g. x-Rays, blood tests, etc on their own do not constitute ‘treatment’. http://www.nashics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Questions-about-Reporting-under-RIDDOR.pdf

I think you will find that the definition is in the wording " is taken from the site to hospital for treatment"

If they are sent/taken to hospital to be checked over after recieving first aid or attedance by a paramedic, NOT reportable even if further treatment is administered at A&E. If they are sent/taken to hospital specifically to recieve further treatment, YES it is reportable.  

Care Homes deal with such cases on a regular basis

So, if a resident, let's say in a Care Home, has an accident (deemed work related i.e. being moved from a sofa to a wheel chair by staff). The accident results in a cut to his leg when he knocks it against the footplate. The on site nurse dresses it, however he is taken directly to hospital to get the injury checked in case stitches are needed. 

At the hospital it is decided stitces aren't needed but the wound is redressed. Is this a RIDDOR ?  

Dressing a wound is treatment; if the Nurse in the care home is regarded in this case as a first-aider it gets a bit clearer. But bearing in mind that since an injury requiring a visit to hospital should be reported to CQC, and CQC is the regulator for H&S in care establishments, its a bit of a moot point really,

John

Any accident in a residential care home, whether the IP is a resident or a member of staff, should be reported to the HSE if it qualifies as a RIDDOR.

It gets reported to the Incident Contact Centre, if it's an injury to a service user its CQC who will come knocking in the first instance. They may call in HSE if they need the expertise, but it goes to CQC in the first instance,

John

It has to be work related, a resident falling over, missing a chair as they went to site down, found on the floor, is not work related

Hi Invictus.

If you look at the example I gave, that would be work-related, 'caused by or arising out of work' is always the first criterion,

John

Edited by user 02 March 2020 12:08:02(UTC)  | Reason: '

Dear SNS - good example of why to avoid quotes