Operative broke the tip of his finger by not following the standard code of practice set by the Association. He visited an NHS medical centre, where the triage nurse was extremely forceful during the assessment of the fingertip. Due to the pressure applied, the operative passed out and had a seizure, leading to his transfer to the nearest A&E unit. The A&E doctor has advised 4 weeks off work due to the seizure. Although fingers are not classified under RIDDOR, an absence of 7 days or more is reportable.

The operative would be able to return to work on light duties if not for the 4-week advisory. Therefore, does the responsibility for filing a RIDDOR fall on us, or does the exacerbation of the injury by a separate entity mean that it is not applicable for us to file the RIDDOR, given that the incident may push the absence beyond the 7-day threshold?

Originally Posted by: CiaranPWalsh

Operative broke the tip of his finger by not following the standard code of practice set by the Association.

Is the association the employer or an industry body the employer is aligned with (i.e. were they trained)?

As to the 4 weeks there will be additional factors involved such as avoiding driving and possible long term impacts in the event a driving licence must be surrendered.

If im reading this correctly, the 4 weeks absence is not due to the accident/injury but the medical treatment - so it would not be RIDDOR - have i missed something?

The assessment caused the i.p. to pass out, the i.p. also suffered a seizure.

It wasn't the passing out that received the 4 week notice which you could relate to the investigation of the work related injury (standard code of practice or not).

14.—(1) Where the injury or death of a person arises out of the conduct of any operation on, or any examination or other medical treatment of, that person (such operation, examination or other treatment being conducted by or under the supervision of a registered medical practitioner or a registered dentist), the requirements of regulations 4, 5, 6(1) and 12(1)(b) do not apply.

So i say again the abscence was not due to the broken finger - which was work related and needs investigating, but due to the seizure brought on by the medical treatment - hence RIDDOR is irrelevant - play devals advocate as much as you want.