When colorectal surgeon, Marc Lamah, was banned from operating at the private hospital Nuffield Health Brighton after concerning complication rates, patients might assume he’d be prevented from practicing elsewhere. They’d be wrong. This case reveals a troubling reality about how healthcare regulation works, and what it means for patient safety.
Background: Private Investigation into Patient Safety Incidents
The BBC investigation into Marc Lamah’s practice at Nuffield Health Brighton began with a whistleblower’s concerns. Internal data revealed that one third of his patients experienced ‘moderate harm events’ across a 12 month period in 2023. This represents six times the expected 5% rate.
Following an independent investigation, Nuffield Health withdrew Mr Lamah’s practicing privileges, stating “his conduct did not meet the standards of medical practice and governance we expect”. The private hospital emphasised that patient safety is their top priority.
What emerged from this investigation highlights significant challenges in improving patient safety NHS-wide. It also heightens scrutiny around how information about surgical performance is shared between the private and public sectors.
NHS Employment: Different Standards, Different Outcomes
Despite losing his practicising privileges at Nuffield Health, Mr Lamah continues working as a colorectal surgeon at Royal Sussex County Hospital. University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust conducted its own separate audit, reaching a starkly different conclusion.
The NHS trust found his outcomes “within expected national ranges” and noted that Nuffield’s investigation had found “no concerns with regard to technical abilities, surgical practice or patient safety.” This has allowed his continued employment, despite the private hospital’s conflicting decision.
The contrast becomes more concerning given the trust’s own challenges. Sussex Police are investigating over 200 cases of alleged medical negligence through Operation Bramber, focusing on the trust’s neurosurgery and general surgery departments between 2015 and 2021.
As one of the NHS’s largest organisations, serving nearly two million people, these oversight questions carry significant weight.
Timeline of Key Events
While Mr Lamah’s problematic outcomes occurred in private practice, his continued NHS employment without disclosure raises questions about improving patient safety NHS-wide, when practitioners move between private and public healthcare without full transparency of their track record.
Here’s what has happened so far:
2023:
- Mr Lamah is suspended by Nuffield Health over complication rate concerns.
- Patient case: Mr Lamah allegedly fails to disclose his suspension before performing surgery on a patient, resulting in bowel damage, sepsis, intensive care, and permanent stoma bag.
- Nuffield Health commence investigation into Mr Lamah’s practices
2024-2025:
- Nuffield Health completes independent investigation and withdraws Mr Lamah’s practicing privileges.
- BBC investigation reveals the regulatory disconnect between private and NHS practice.
How Patients Can Protect Themselves
This case demonstrates that patients cannot rely solely on regulatory systems to identify concerning practitioners. Here’s how to conduct your own due diligence:
Before a Procedure:
- Check GMC registration and any current restrictions.
- Research outcomes through professional databases (e.g., Association of Coloproctology: https://www.acpgbi.org.uk/patients/outcome_data/).
- Ask directly about suspension history across all practice settings.
- Request specific complication rates for your procedure type.
- Seek second opinions for complex surgeries.
Red Flag Questions:
- Has this surgeon had privileges withdrawn anywhere else?
- Are they subject to ongoing investigations?
- What are their personal complication rates versus national averages?
Patients are encouraged not to wait for systemic reform. Instead, by actively researching providers and asking direct questions about their complete practice history, you can make more informed decisions about your healthcar
Why Patient Vigilance Still Matters
The investigation into Marc Lamah’s private practice highlights how difficult it can be for patients to rely on existing systems to keep them safe. When one hospital identifies serious patient-safety concerns but another continues to allow the same surgeon to operate, the gap in transparency becomes a real risk, and not just a technical one.
Ultimately, patients are entitled to expect consistent standards of care across all settings. Yet this case shows that those standards are only as effective as the information-sharing that supports them. Until data about a doctor’s complication rates and disciplinary actions flow freely between providers, patients themselves may be the last to know when something has gone wrong.
For now, the most practical safeguard is vigilance. Patients should ask direct questions, check professional registers, and seek second opinions when in doubt. These steps should never have to replace proper regulation, but in the current climate they can make a crucial difference to safety and peace of mind.
If you’ve experienced complications or poor outcomes following surgery and are concerned about how your care was handled, CL Medilaw’s specialist medical negligence team can offer confidential advice.
Contact us today to talk about your experience and understand your options.
