Singapore General Hospital review: Request for remedial action due to service dissatisfaction

Dear Sir and Madam,

I am reaching out to express my deep concerns and dissatisfaction regarding the communication and service provided by Singapore General Hospital concerning my late grandfather, Mr. Budijono's blood test results.

Patient name: Budijono Widjaja, Patient number: X0170002756I

Brief Overview:

Over the past few months, I have engaged in multiple email correspondences to schedule a consultation and access my grandfather's blood test results via email. Despite facing challenges with my grandfather's deteriorating physical and mental health, and the availabitly of traveling to Singapore, also our doctor unavailability while we were in SIngapore etc, which I communicated explicitly, the resolution provided did not meet our needs, leading to avoidable distress.

For clarity, here's a chronological breakdown of our communication:

- 24th July, 2023: Mr. Budijono took a blood test at SGH, for which we paid SGD 1109.

- 31st July: Samuel Duong suggested that Prof. Damien is agreeable to a video consultation and mentioned that they are waiting for a tentative date in mid-August. We awaited further updates.

- 17th August: After waiting 17 days for a follow-up, Samuel Duong finally scheduled a video consultation for 18th September at 1:30 pm.

- 21st August: I informed Samuel of our unavailability on the scheduled date and requested if another doctor could review the results in person during our visit between 11th-14th September.

- 29th August: Samuel confirmed that Dr. Ho Kay Woon could access the blood results, but reiterated the recommendation for a video consultation.

- 18th September: I communicated that Mr. Budijono couldn't attend the video consultation on that day due to his health.

- 9th October: I inquired about obtaining the blood test results.

- 10th October: Samuel pointed out our absence from the video consultation and requested we proceed with it first before accessing the results.

- 11th October: In two separate emails, I clarified our consultation with Dr. Ho and reiterated our challenges with arranging a video consultation for Mr. Budijono due to his deteriorating mental health. I also requested if my mother could attend in his place.

- 12th October: Despite my explanations, Samuel responded that as long as Mr. Budijono could attend the Zoom meeting, the video consultation could proceed. This further highlighted a lack of understanding and empathy for our situation.

- 23rd October: Mr. Budijono tragically passed away.

- 27th October: I reached out again to request the blood test results, emphasizing that he would never be able to attend a consultation due to his unfortunate passing.

- 30th October: Olivia Jakarias, writing on behalf of Samuel, sent condolences from Dr. Damien Tan and provided the blood test results.

After the above exchanges, I shared feedback on our experience, to which Samuel responded acknowledging that a clearer understanding could have led to exceptions being made regarding the video consultation.

Throughout this period, our primary objective was clear: to obtain Mr. Budijono's blood test results, so we can consult any doctor in the home country. Despite my consistent communication, our needs and challenges were, unfortunately, not addressed satisfactorily.

However, what compels me to write this letter most urgently is the latest response I received from Samuel Duong. Despite my consistent communication about the challenges my family and, most importantly, Mr. Budijono faced, Samuel's reply was: "Exception can be made had we had a clearer understanding on the reasons that the patient could not make it for the Video Consultation – Much regrets that we did not prompt you further on this."

This statement was particularly distressing because:

1. Reiteration of Difficulties: I repeatedly mentioned the challenges in getting my grandfather to participate in a video consultation due to his deteriorating mental health. This statement feel dismissive of those multiple communications.

2. Ambiguity: The word "exception" is rather vague. Without clear guidelines or explanations about what circumstances qualify for an "exception," it places the onus on the patient's family to explicitly detail very personal and sometimes painful circumstances to receive appropriate care and attention.

3. Empathy Gap: The phrase "Much regrets that we did not prompt you further on this" might come across as lacking in genuine empathy. It implies that I didn't provide enough information, even though I did communicate the situation multiple times.

4. Emotional Context: Given the emotional and challenging nature of dealing with a family member's health, such statements can feel insensitive, especially when I am seeking understanding and support.

Given this series of events and the emotional toll on our family, I believe it's fair and justified to request:

1. Refund of the Blood Test Charges: Considering the challenges and barriers faced in accessing the results, I request a full refund of SGD 1109.

2. Formal Written Apology: An acknowledgment from the hospital about the distress and inconvenience caused by these oversights.

3. Review of Patient Communication Protocols: I urge SGH to review and improve its communication processes to ensure that future patients or their families do not undergo a similar experience.

I trust that you will treat this matter with the urgency and seriousness it deserves. It is my sincere hope that we can resolve this matter amicably and avoid exploring other avenues, including legal recourse.

Thank you for your attention and understanding.

Warm regards,

Sin Wei

+[protected]