Awful experience
Awful experience, on the day off the operation I had a translator for 2 hours prior to the operation, whilst down in theatre no one was able to speak English , so there was no form of being able to communicate with me , very frightening when you don’t know what is going on or being said. After the operation whilst in the French hospital trying to get pain relief was difficult as no one understood you. The hospital cleanses was very poor . Since having the operation I have had nothing but problems when back in the uk , I’ve ended up in hospital multiple times with sepsis and streptococcosis due to not enough cement being used making the implant come loose. Have had to have the implant removed and am currently waiting to have a new one put in by the NHS. I have tried to claim on the firms insurance after providing all documents proving that not enough cement was used , but they are saying there insurance won’t accept responsibility. Avoid using this company as all reviews are on Facebook and there is no negative ones which I have found when trying to post one they remove it.
Svar från Non active
We are sorry to read this review and sincerely wish Linda a full recovery. However, several statements do not correspond to the records and communications we retained throughout her care. She travelled to France in 2025 for TKR. Before travelling, she had a video consultation with our UK team and a separate consultation with her surgeon where all risks associated were explained including Revision. She told us she would travel with her husband, who would assist her. After arrival, we were informed that her husband had returned to the UK, leaving her alone before surgery. Once aware that she was distressed, our team immediately provided support. We also responded promptly to her practical needs. I.e. when she explained that the chair in her apartment did not allow her to extend her leg, we provided a footstool. When this remained uncomfortable, we purchased only for her a single big leather reclining chair which could also be used as a bed. Following surgery, our team remained in regular contact. Her surgeon is fully bilingual and visited her in room several times. The suggestion that she was left without communication or support does absolutely not reflect the arrangements in place. She received regular physiotherapy at the residence. Before returning to the UK, she underwent a discharge consultation, including X-rays and a physical examination, and the assessment was satisfactory. The subsequent difficulties arose after her return home. Approximately five weeks after surgery, Linda told us she had bent down to pick up her granddaughter and suddenly felt a “pop” in her knee. Until then, she had reported doing well and using the stairs without difficulty. We immediately recommended further investigation in France, which she declined, confident that situation will get better soon. When her pain increased, we repeatedly recommended that she return to France for reassessment by her surgeon. She instead chose local assement. When she raised concerns about the implant, we provided the relevant documentation, including its reference and serial number. When she later told us she was attending A&E because she felt the implant "was moving" and could not walk properly, we again recommended an immediate return to France! Her surgeon and clinic were prepared to receive her, but she chose to continue locally. The medical reports shared with us did not establish implant failure or infection. Her surgeon requested copies of her X-rays for review, but these were not provided. On January, we again recommended assessment in France and offered to arrange and cover her return, accommodation and medical assessment. She hesitate and finally declined, stating that her local hospital had reassured her. Her statement that insufficient cement was used : We have not been provided with medical evidence establishing this conclusion, and it is not supported by the documentation available to us. Shortly before publication, We received a threatening email from her, requesting a refund of half of the treatment cost and indicated that, if this was not accepted, she would take steps to damage our reputation publicly and on social media. We have retained the correspondence and supporting documentation and referred the matter to our insurers and legal advisers. Over a period of four months, she received successive misdiagnoses locally, which delayed her care and led to serious complications. We strongly reject the allegation that we remove negative reviews or manipulate patient feedback. Our activity and patient results can be independently evidenced. 99,99% of our patients are very satisfied. Our package includes six-month insurance and support if complications arise, including returning to France for further assessment and corrective surgery at NO ADDITIONAL COST. This option was repeatedly offered to Linda, but she chose not to follow the guidance despite our repeated recommendations .We genuinely sympathise with the patient and wish her a full recovery.