"It was a pity I had to complain before listened to"

Following a series of niggling problems - chest pains, recurring conjunctivitis, constant oral thrush, palpitations, Raynaud's disease - I decided it was time to see a GP, but despite the most recent being chest pains, I had to wait over a month for an appointment. I was able to see a paramedic however and with advice they told me to go straight to A&E. I had been told that I should have dialled 999 when the chest pains occurred but living out in a very rural part of Mid Devon I frankly didn't think an ambulance would get to me for some time so I waited until the following morning to visit my local surgery and ask for an appointment.

There then followed a series of blood tests which had to be repeated because the first two were apparently thrown away before being tested.

However, the results showed I have anti-nuclear antibodies and my monitoring for that has been excellent albeit slow for obvious reasons.

I awoke with a pulse rate of 160. I didn't ring 999 for the reason given above but called 111 and they suggested I go straight to A&E driven by my husband. They rang ahead and this meant I saw the triage nurse promptly while my pulse rate was still. They moved me on to the A&E ward, where I was put on a monitor. I understand that it is important for me to have an ECG while my pulse is racing. However, it was a couple of hours before a nurse arrived to do an ECG, by which time my pulse rate had returned to under 100.

When I finally saw a doctor, they said they suspected atrial fibrillation but couldn't confirm it unless an ECG was done while my pulse was high - I know A&E is busy but surely if this is the case, and they were able to prioritise me when I first arrived, why they were not able to prioritise giving me an ECG while my pulse was still racing?

The doctor said they would be writing to my GP and we left the hospital. Two months later I had heard nothing about this apparent contact with my GP. In the meantime I had severe pain which turned out to be gallstones. I rang the surgery and saw a GP that day - excellent - and she agreed that I probably had gall stones. This was confirmed when I had a scan and I was told that a letter would go to my GP the same day.

Previously, following a blood test, a doctor from the surgery had phoned me to ask how I felt because he said the blood test had shown my liver was all over the place. I heard nothing more so, when I still had heard nothing re my possible AF nor about my gallstones, I contacted the surgery who gave me a telephone appointment. I had to complain, this really wasn't soon enough and I'm glad to say the surgery then arranged for me to have an appointment the following week.

At this appointment the doctor took great care to explain about the gall stones. When I asked why I hadn't had any follow up from the surgery about my possible AF, I was told they suspected that I was supposed to contact them despite the A&E doctor saying they would write to inform them. Since my complaint I have received excellent treatment and have been very impressed by the care everyone has taken.

I just felt it was a pity I had to complain before my various problems were treated proactively. I don't like complaining, particularly with the NHS which I value very highly. I know the NHS is under severe pressure and individual staff have been mostly marvellous. However, I do believe that reasonable complaints may help improvements for all. Which is why I have written this rather lengthy feedback.