When stroke treatment goes wrong

When someone suffers a stroke, every minute matters. But the speed of treatment is not the only factor that can affect their recovery. Correctly identifying the type of stroke and ensuring that medication is appropriate can also be critical.

Strokes are broadly classified into two main categories: ischaemic and haemorrhagic. An ischaemic stroke occurs when blood flow to part of the brain is interrupted, usually by a blood clot. A haemorrhagic stroke involves bleeding within or around the brain following the rupture of a blood vessel.
An ischaemic stroke may also be complicated by haemorrhagic transformation, where bleeding develops within the area of brain tissue damaged by the original stroke. This can cause further neurological injury and serious complications.

Ben’s experience demonstrates the devastating consequences that can follow when treatment after a stroke goes wrong.

In June 2019, Ben was 39 and working in security when he collapsed while taking his son to football practice. He was taken to hospital confused and slurring his words.
Scans confirmed an acute ischaemic stroke affecting the right middle cerebral artery territory. Expert evidence subsequently obtained in his clinical negligence claim indicated that, given his age, Ben would probably have made a reasonable recovery from the initial stroke.

Following his admission, Ben was prescribed and given dalteparin, an anticoagulant. Expert evidence concluded that, in his circumstances, the medication should not have been administered because of the increased risk of haemorrhage.

The NHS Trust later acknowledged through the Duty of Candour process that dalteparin had been prescribed in error and that the mistake had not been identified before the medication was administered.

Following the administration of dalteparin, Ben’s condition deteriorated dramatically. He became confused and agitated and developed projectile vomiting, a severe headache and seizures.

Urgent imaging revealed a major haemorrhagic transformation of his original stroke. This included a substantial 6cm haematoma and significant pressure on his brain.

Ben required emergency decompressive brain surgery, followed by further surgery to evacuate the haematoma. He spent three weeks in an induced coma.

Ben survived but was left with profound physical and cognitive disabilities. The extent to which those disabilities resulted from the haemorrhagic transformation, rather than the original ischaemic stroke, remains a central issue in his clinical negligence claim.

Ben has no functional use of his left arm and experiences significant mobility difficulties. He requires substantial assistance from his wife, is unlikely to return to employment and has significant ongoing care and rehabilitation needs.

To understand how treatment affected Ben’s recovery, two things must be considered: the injury caused by the original stroke, and the additional harm that may result from negligent treatment afterwards.

Expert neurological evidence obtained on Ben’s behalf concluded that dalteparin significantly contributed to the subsequent haemorrhage. The evidence also indicated that, without the medication, he would probably have achieved a substantially better recovery.

The central issue in his legal claim is therefore the extent of the additional injury caused by the medication error.

Assessing the consequences of negligent treatment requires consideration of the recovery the patient would probably have achieved had the error not occurred, and identification of the additional injuries and losses attributable to it.

The NHS Trust has partially admitted liability but disputes responsibility for the full extent of Ben’s disabilities. In February 2026, an interim payment of £250,000 was secured to help fund rehabilitation, care, case management and more suitable accommodation.
The claim continues to focus on the extent to which the medication error caused additional harm and the Trust’s responsibility for the full consequences.
“A stroke can have devastating consequences for both patients and their families, but it is important to distinguish between the effects of the original stroke and any additional harm caused by errors in treatment. In Ben’s case, the neurological evidence indicates that, without the medication error, he would probably have achieved a substantially better recovery. Establishing the extent of that avoidable injury is essential, not only to determining liability, but also to securing the care, rehabilitation and support he will need for the future.” — Antonia Jones, Associate Solicitor, Clinical Negligence, Fletchers Solicitors

If you’re concerned about care after a stroke, it’s important to look beyond the initial emergency. Ben’s case shows how treatment afterwards can affect recovery.

The initial stroke may be unavoidable, but negligent treatment afterwards can fundamentally alter a patient’s prognosis and future. In Ben’s case, expert evidence indicates that the medication error significantly contributed to a further haemorrhage, which is said to have worsened his neurological outcome.

You may find it difficult to know which effects came from the stroke and which came from treatment. Understanding that difference can help you find out whether mistakes in care caused further harm.
Every case is different. If you’re worried that treatment caused further harm, a specialist solicitor can investigate what happened. They’ll use the medical evidence to assess whether care fell below the required standard and whether that caused additional injury.

If you’re worried that stroke treatment caused avoidable harm, a specialist clinical negligence solicitor can help investigate what happened and whether you may have a claim.

This can involve reviewing medical records and obtaining independent expert evidence to assess whether the treatment fell below an acceptable standard and caused additional injury.

If your claim succeeds, compensation may help pay for the care and rehabilitation you need. It may also help fund someone to coordinate your support or accommodation that better meets your needs. What you can claim depends on your circumstances.

Understanding the full impact of any treatment error can help identify the care and support someone may need for the future.

When stroke treatment goes wrong, the effects can reach far beyond your recovery. Your family may need support too. If you’re worried about the care you or someone close to you received, we’re here to help you understand what happened.

At Fletchers, our specialist medical negligence lawyers understand how complex stroke treatment can be. We’ll look closely at the care you received to understand whether an error affected your recovery and what support you may need.

Contact us to talk about your concerns. We’ll explain the next steps and help you understand whether further investigation could be right for you.

*Ben’s name has been changed to protect his privacy.