Recurring concern

Failure to maintain a shared clinical overview of patients' changing concerns

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 6 Jun 2014•Latest report 11 Nov 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the bounded care-team liaison and clinical-overview process, including inadequate communication between nursing and medical staff, incomplete sharing or review of patient concerns and attendances, and failures to maintain a longitudinal view across different staff or visits when these can cause deterioration or significant symptoms to be missed.

Not included

  • Excludes generic communication, staffing, training or documentation deficiencies unless they directly impair the shared clinical overview of a patient's changing concerns.
  • Excludes failures confined to a named handover, discharge, referral or inter-agency information-sharing system where that distinct process is the unsafe condition.
  • Excludes failures involving only an individual clinician's diagnostic judgment or clinical treatment when no shared-overview or liaison deficiency is identified.
  • Excludes neutral descriptions of multidisciplinary working or care coordination without an unsafe failure to maintain a current clinical overview.
Reports
9

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
11

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
20

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department of Health and Social Care2
Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust1
Bolton NHS Foundation Trust1
Care Quality Commission1
East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust1
Haughton Thornley Medical Centres1
King'S College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust1
NHS Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group1
NHS England1
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board1
North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust1
North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust1
Roseland1
Tameside General Hospital1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Joan Elizabeth Talbot · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Joan Talbot had progressive complications from previous radiotherapy, including recurrent urinary tract infections, hydronephrosis and bloody diarrhoea. She was admitted to hospital on 14 August 2022, developed sepsis associated with a dislodged ureteric stent, and died on 24 August 2022 despite treatment. The principal concern was a lack of continuity of care across three earlier admissions, which meant the significance of her diarrhoea was not fully appreciated and delayed investigation.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to maintain continuity of care across admitting teams

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Mrs Talbot had been admitted on 3 occasions when a history of diarrhoea, at times bloody, was reported before her final fourth admission. On each occasion she came under a different admitting team. There were gaps in continuity of care such that the significance of her history of diarrhoea was not fully appreciated resulting in delays in this presentation being investigated. Although the Trust has subsequently introduced a new record system that has the potential to assist with continuity of care, it has not asked itself how this system can be used most effectively to ensure continuity of care in this specific scenario, whether further refinements to the existing systems and processes may be required. ”

    Source location

    Joan Elizabeth Talbot · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Produce and use the Problem List Etiquette Guide to standardize problem-list and associated documentation practices.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “in October 2023, a number of quality improvement pieces of work have been undertaken to improve patient safety & quality, through an initial ‘stabilisation phase’ of urgent work, followed by an ‘optimisation phase’ of improving functionality across a number of domains. We are conscious that further improvements are required and we are not complacent with regard to pace and scope of this work. Improvements in medical notes documentation commenced over the last few months, in particular a ‘Problem List Etiquette Guide’ has been produced, which outlines expectations for the use of problem lists and associated documentation fields.”

    Source location

    Response from Kings College Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Establish a cross-Trust EPIC Documentation Quality Group to assess data quality, oversee documentation enhancements and lead targeted quality-improvement initiatives.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although the referenced problem list functionality was not yet deployed at the time of the incident (as the previous electronic patient record system was still in operation), the Trust acknowledges there is scope to enhance both EPIC’s documentation capabilities and the guidance provided to clinicians regarding its use. Therefore, in response to the concerns raised, the Trust has committed to establishing a cross-Trust EPIC Documentation Quality Group (‘DQG’). The DQG will be responsible for developing mechanisms to assess and monitor data quality, overseeing enhancements to documentation functionality, and leading targeted quality improvement initiatives. The drafting of the DQG’s terms of reference has specifically addressed the matters raised within the PFD, ensuring that the DQG’s work programme is both data-driven and aligned with identified risks.”

    Source location

    Response from Kings College Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Agree EPIC documentation metrics and audit standards to establish baseline quality and track improvement.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although the referenced problem list functionality was not yet deployed at the time of the incident (as the previous electronic patient record system was still in operation), the Trust acknowledges there is scope to enhance both EPIC’s documentation capabilities and the guidance provided to clinicians regarding its use. Therefore, in response to the concerns raised, the Trust has committed to establishing a cross-Trust EPIC Documentation Quality Group (‘DQG’). The DQG will be responsible for developing mechanisms to assess and monitor data quality, overseeing enhancements to documentation functionality, and leading targeted quality improvement initiatives. The drafting of the DQG’s terms of reference has specifically addressed the matters raised within the PFD, ensuring that the DQG’s work programme is both data-driven and aligned with identified risks.”

    Source location

    Response from Kings College Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Oversee EPIC build changes, including navigators and note templates, to facilitate documentation quality improvement.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although the referenced problem list functionality was not yet deployed at the time of the incident (as the previous electronic patient record system was still in operation), the Trust acknowledges there is scope to enhance both EPIC’s documentation capabilities and the guidance provided to clinicians regarding its use. Therefore, in response to the concerns raised, the Trust has committed to establishing a cross-Trust EPIC Documentation Quality Group (‘DQG’). The DQG will be responsible for developing mechanisms to assess and monitor data quality, overseeing enhancements to documentation functionality, and leading targeted quality improvement initiatives. The drafting of the DQG’s terms of reference has specifically addressed the matters raised within the PFD, ensuring that the DQG’s work programme is both data-driven and aligned with identified risks.”

    Source location

    Response from Kings College Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Design and oversee targeted documentation quality-improvement projects before wider rollout.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although the referenced problem list functionality was not yet deployed at the time of the incident (as the previous electronic patient record system was still in operation), the Trust acknowledges there is scope to enhance both EPIC’s documentation capabilities and the guidance provided to clinicians regarding its use. Therefore, in response to the concerns raised, the Trust has committed to establishing a cross-Trust EPIC Documentation Quality Group (‘DQG’). The DQG will be responsible for developing mechanisms to assess and monitor data quality, overseeing enhancements to documentation functionality, and leading targeted quality improvement initiatives. The drafting of the DQG’s terms of reference has specifically addressed the matters raised within the PFD, ensuring that the DQG’s work programme is both data-driven and aligned with identified risks.”

    Source location

    Response from Kings College Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 November 2025

    Open published response
  2. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Esme Vera Louise Atkinson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Esme Vera Louise Atkinson was born on 7 February 2024 and died at Stepping Hill Hospital on 17 March 2024 after suddenly stopping breathing. A post-mortem examination found a ventricular septal defect, and the report states that earlier identification would probably have prevented her death at that time. Concerns included missed opportunities to identify the defect, inadequate recognition of feeding and weight concerns, gaps in professional training and information sharing, and the absence of routine echocardiography and auditing of cardiac images in relevant circumstances.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficient sharing of information about feeding and weight loss concerns

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The inquest heard evidence that health visitors /midwives and GPs play a key role in the early identification of a heart defect such as Esme’s at an early stage. Such a defect will rarely be apparent at the 72 hour check on the evidence given at the inquest but symptoms will manifest subsequently. Such symptoms can be subtle and the inquest was told that for there to be early suspicion, of a heart defect, training for community midwives/health visitors and GPs needed to be improved and good quality information sharing was also essential. This should include concerns around feeding and weight loss. ”

    Source location

    Esme Vera Louise Atkinson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Digitalise the red book and progressively add information and functionality to improve access to growth and feeding data.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Once feeding is established, babies should usually be weighed at around 8, 12 and 16 weeks and 1 year at the time of routine immunisations. We recognise that the red book is an important tool for tracking and sharing information between healthcare professionals, and we are digitalising the red book to improve access to this data. Over time, we will add more information and create more functionality, including AI analytics, to ensure the best care is provided for the child, including detecting any anomalies in weight gain or feeding.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 4 · response
    Published 18 June 2025

    Open published response
  3. Norfolk

    AI-generated summary

    Kenneth George Willard KING · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Kenneth George Willard KING had bilateral leg wounds requiring community nursing care, with delays in some visits and subsequent infection. He was admitted to hospital with cellulitis of both legs and died on 12 November 2023 from septic shock due to bilateral leg cellulitis. Concerns included the absence of a formal structure for physiological observations in community patients and delays in implementing staff training and restrictions on untrained bank staff.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to maintain and review a complete view of a patient's presentation and deterioration across community visits

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community. Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP. No specific questions are asked of the patient, such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken. It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician, which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians. Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that. Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses. In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked. ”

    Source location

    Kenneth George Willard KING · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Pilot named-clinician and geographical-area caseloads and analyse the results to inform the future community nursing model.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Handovers are completed to share learning and patient updates and clinical leads are available to support with complex patient discussions and escalation of conditions. As a trust we recognise the importance of continuity of care and are currently piloting a named clinician and geographical area caseload approach which is being analysed and will inform the development of our future community nursing model.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop more consistent approaches to patient-record review before visits, including for urgent-care visits.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “All community clinicians are given thirty minutes protected time each day for visit preparation, which includes reviewing of patient records prior to visits. We acknowledge that the record review can be variable across clinicians practice and that is an area of focus to understand why. It is also recognised that clinicians responding to urgent care visits may not have the ability to review the record at all prior to the visit. We are looking at ways to ensure more consistency with the senior operational and quality leadership team.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Operational pressures make consistent allocation of individual community clinicians difficult, requiring staff movement to minimise patient risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history from that visit. Due to operational pressures and the need to work flexibly with staff allocation to ensure patients with priority and complex needs are seen in a timely manner, it continues to be very difficult to provide consistent staff allocation to individual patients. Whilst this would be best practice for continuity of care, escalation actions such as the movement of staff are sometimes required to minimise risk to our patients. Whenever possible continuity of care is maintained and patients most at risk or at end of life would be prioritised.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Clinicians attending urgent care visits may be unable to review patient records before the visit, limiting consistent record review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “All community clinicians are given thirty minutes protected time each day for visit preparation, which includes reviewing of patient records prior to visits. We acknowledge that the record review can be variable across clinicians practice and that is an area of focus to understand why. It is also recognised that clinicians responding to urgent care visits may not have the ability to review the record at all prior to the visit. We are looking at ways to ensure more consistency with the senior operational and quality leadership team.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2024

    Open published response
  4. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Joyce May DENNIS · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Joyce May Dennis, a resident of Roseacre Care Home, became unwell on 9 September 2019 and deteriorated over the following days before being admitted to hospital with sepsis and the onset of a heart attack. She died at 15.30 on 13 September 2019. The principal concerns were inadequate monitoring and record-keeping, failure to investigate or escalate worsening symptoms, insufficient staff training about illness and sepsis in older people, poor liaison, and failure to record family concerns.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of liaison and overview across care staff

    Wider context from the report

    “3. There was evidence of failure to ask Joyce simple questions to elicit whether concern was needed; trivialization of her symptoms by people who were not medically qualified to say that those symptoms were trivial; and a general lack of liaison with each other and overview such that in snapshot form it was possible to miss or to minimise the symptoms Joyce had over the course of a week and to make assumptions which then put Joyce at risk. ”

    Source location

    Joyce May DENNIS · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 7 · concerns

    Open source report
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Michael William Flynn · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Michael William Flynn underwent elective hip replacement surgery and required a blood transfusion. He subsequently experienced inadequate Early Warning Score monitoring, failures to follow escalation procedures, incomplete fluid-balance monitoring, and a lack of timely clinical review before suffering cardiac arrest and dying on 17 July 2018.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to communicate deterioration between ward doctors and nursing staff

    Wider context from the report

    “5. The ward was staffed by ward doctors throughout the day but there was no documentation to suggest communication between the ward doctors and nursing staff in relation to Mr Flynn and his deteriorating picture ”

    Source location

    Michael William Flynn · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Addressed orthopaedic NEWS-policy noncompliance through staff discussions and circulated responsibilities for recording and escalation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Matron for the Orthopaedic Unit has provided assurances that formal discussions have taken place with the nursing staff identified through our investigation as failing to comply with Trust Policy in respect to the regularity, recording and appropriate escalation of NEWS observations, and consideration given to identified support or training needs. Additionally, I understand the ward manager has circulated a newsletter to all staff reiterating their responsibilities and accountability with regards to the appropriate recording and escalation of NEWS, including -”

    Source location

    2019-0008-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-Care-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 May 2019

    Open published response
  6. Blackpool and the Fylde

    AI-generated summary

    Bernard Cosgrove · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Bernard Cosgrove was admitted to hospital on 28 February 2017 after being observed unresponsive and was discharged to his nursing home on 10 March 2017 with a dislocated right hip joint that had started to become infected. He died at the nursing home on 21 March 2017 from bronchopneumonia, with significant heart disease and hip joint infection contributing to his death. The principal concerns were that the dislocation was not recognised for seven days, that relevant medical-record information was not incorporated into his care, and that patient monitoring and consideration of medical records were insufficient.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to incorporate identified clinical findings into subsequent nursing care plans

    Wider context from the report

    “The concerns are: • Despite an entry in the clinical records made by a doctor on 3rd March 2017 which refers to a rotating right leg, neither the issue he identifies nor his entry in the notes appear to have been appreciated by nursing staff who cared for Mr Cosgrove thereafter. A Sister who was a clear and helpful witness acknowledged in court that the issue identified by the doctor on 3rd March 2017 was not considered as part of his plan of care subsequently. This is despite the fact that between 3rd March 2017 and discharge from hospital he was seen regularly by staff with responsibility for physically rolling him with a view to providing pressure relief. • Although from the evidence it is not known how the dislocation occurred the fact it does not appear to have been recognised over a period of 7 days is concerning and strongly suggests that staff paid insufficient regard to the patient's previous medical record entries. Patients such as Mr Cosgrove should not find themselves being discharged from hospital in such circumstances and at a time when the medical professionals looking after his welfare are unaware of such an issue. • But for the fact he was discharged from hospital on 10th March 2017 and that this resulted in the dislocation problem being identified, had he spent a lengthier period in hospital the dislocation and developing infection may well have continued to go unrecognised which raises a concern about how effectively patients are being monitored and their medical records are being considered by staff who are subsequently involved in that patient's care. On this occasion once the dislocation issue was identified this did not substantially alter his care and he was treated conservatively, but in other circumstances not recognising the problem may have directly caused a death. ”

    Source location

    Bernard Cosgrove · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement lessons learned from the internal review of patient care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is acknowledged that, sadly, the necessity to x-ray Mr Cosgrove’s hip was not acted upon post the recommendation on the 3rd March 2017. The nursing staff continued with Mr Cosgrove’s plan of care until his discharge on the 10th March 2017, this included a strict turning regime given his susceptibility to developing pressure damage, which for a patient like Mr Cosgrove could have been fatal. The Trust cannot, identify why, in Mr Cosgrove’s case, there was no further record or action taken in terms of investigation into the potential findings from the 3rd March 2017 and for this we apologise. However, having undertaken an internal review of Mr Cosgrove’s care, lessons have been learnt and are being implemented.”

    Source location

    2017-0285-Response-by-Blackpool-Teaching-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 November 2017

    Open published response
  7. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    Mollie Bentham · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mollie Bentham died at Rivington View Nursing Home on 1 May 2015 after deteriorating following her transfer there from Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre. Concerns included failures to record and communicate family reports of abdominal pain, inadequate clinical review and documentation, absent or incomplete handovers, and insufficiently detailed multidisciplinary meeting records. The report identified risks to future patients, particularly those unable to communicate their symptoms.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to record family concerns, clinical attendances and observed symptoms in patient notes

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. The notes at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre did not refer to the family concerns expressed to the nursing staff from the 23rd April 2015 onwards and the notes did not include a note from the out of hours General Practitioner, who attended Darley Court on the 26th April 2015, nor the attendance of ████████ on the 27th April 2015. The notes did not make any reference to abdominal pain suffered by Miss Bentham until the 28th April 2015, even though the family expressed concerns with regard to abdominal pain on the 23rd April 2015. ii. There was no evidence of liaison between the nursing staff and the medical staff at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre, particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and with regard to the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iii. There was no evidence of handovers at shift changes as between nursing staff and medical staff particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iv. The notes of the Multi-Disciplinary Team Meetings, including the Meeting on the 27th April 2015, did not give details of who was present at the Meeting, the actions to be taken following the Meeting together with the person who was given responsibility to take the actions and a timescale in relation to the actions. The above concerns are particularly relevant in relation to a patient, like Miss Bentham, who was unable to communicate with either nursing staff or medical staff. In such circumstances and in the absence of documented and noted information in relation to family concerns a condition suffered by the patient may be left untreated without consideration by a reviewing doctor or a Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting. v. The above issues raise training issues in relation to staff, both nursing and medical, at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre. vi. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues, particularly where known symptoms observed by the family are not brought to the attention of the reviewing medical team and no investigations are conducted with regard to the observed symptoms. ”

    Source location

    Mollie Bentham · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Inadequate training of nursing and medical staff in the above information-management processes

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. The notes at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre did not refer to the family concerns expressed to the nursing staff from the 23rd April 2015 onwards and the notes did not include a note from the out of hours General Practitioner, who attended Darley Court on the 26th April 2015, nor the attendance of ████████ on the 27th April 2015. The notes did not make any reference to abdominal pain suffered by Miss Bentham until the 28th April 2015, even though the family expressed concerns with regard to abdominal pain on the 23rd April 2015. ii. There was no evidence of liaison between the nursing staff and the medical staff at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre, particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and with regard to the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iii. There was no evidence of handovers at shift changes as between nursing staff and medical staff particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iv. The notes of the Multi-Disciplinary Team Meetings, including the Meeting on the 27th April 2015, did not give details of who was present at the Meeting, the actions to be taken following the Meeting together with the person who was given responsibility to take the actions and a timescale in relation to the actions. The above concerns are particularly relevant in relation to a patient, like Miss Bentham, who was unable to communicate with either nursing staff or medical staff. In such circumstances and in the absence of documented and noted information in relation to family concerns a condition suffered by the patient may be left untreated without consideration by a reviewing doctor or a Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting. v. The above issues raise training issues in relation to staff, both nursing and medical, at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre. vi. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues, particularly where known symptoms observed by the family are not brought to the attention of the reviewing medical team and no investigations are conducted with regard to the observed symptoms. ”

    Source location

    Mollie Bentham · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of nursing and medical staff to liaise about patient concerns and clinical attendances

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. The notes at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre did not refer to the family concerns expressed to the nursing staff from the 23rd April 2015 onwards and the notes did not include a note from the out of hours General Practitioner, who attended Darley Court on the 26th April 2015, nor the attendance of ████████ on the 27th April 2015. The notes did not make any reference to abdominal pain suffered by Miss Bentham until the 28th April 2015, even though the family expressed concerns with regard to abdominal pain on the 23rd April 2015. ii. There was no evidence of liaison between the nursing staff and the medical staff at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre, particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and with regard to the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iii. There was no evidence of handovers at shift changes as between nursing staff and medical staff particularly in relation to the concerns expressed by the family and the attendance of the out of hours General Practitioner on the 26th April 2015. iv. The notes of the Multi-Disciplinary Team Meetings, including the Meeting on the 27th April 2015, did not give details of who was present at the Meeting, the actions to be taken following the Meeting together with the person who was given responsibility to take the actions and a timescale in relation to the actions. The above concerns are particularly relevant in relation to a patient, like Miss Bentham, who was unable to communicate with either nursing staff or medical staff. In such circumstances and in the absence of documented and noted information in relation to family concerns a condition suffered by the patient may be left untreated without consideration by a reviewing doctor or a Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting. v. The above issues raise training issues in relation to staff, both nursing and medical, at Darley Court Intermediate Care Centre. vi. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues, particularly where known symptoms observed by the family are not brought to the attention of the reviewing medical team and no investigations are conducted with regard to the observed symptoms. ”

    Source location

    Mollie Bentham · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide Darley Court staff direct access to an out-of-hours GP and require consultation details to be documented in Darley Court medical notes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Darley Court staff now have direct access to an Out of Hours (OOH) General Practitioner (GP) who is attached to the Admission Avoidance Team (AAT). The GP is with the AAT from 18:30 to 22:00 Monday to Friday and 9:00 to 22:00on Saturday and Sunday. Patients that require urgent medical attention outside of the hours of medical cover by the doctor at Darley Court but within the hours stipulated above will be seen by the OOH GP based at the AAT. It has been agreed with BARDOC (OOH GP Provider) that the GP will document details of the consultation in the medical notes at Darley Court. This will ensure that both the nursing and medical staff are informed of the treatment plan for the patient. I understand that this service has been utilised and positive feedback has been received from staff at Darley Court.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 1 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Disseminate record-keeping guidance and escalation guidance, and remind staff to document and escalate patient concerns appropriately.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Matron ████████ has reminded all staff that any concerns raised regarding a patient need to be clearly documented in the patient’s ongoing records and escalated where appropriate. A copy of the NMC guidelines has been circulated to all nursing staff highlighting the importance of accurate record keeping. Escalation guidance has also been produced to be read in conjunction with National Early Warning Score (NEWS) guidance.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide weekly and monthly documentation and record-keeping training for Darley Court staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Documentation training is also now included in the new weekly training programme, furthermore additional training is being provided on a monthly basis in respect of documentation and record keeping. Monthly documentation audits are now being undertaken to ensure compliance with this action and ensure the quality of record keeping is improved.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Conduct monthly documentation audits to monitor compliance and improve record-keeping quality.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Documentation training is also now included in the new weekly training programme, furthermore additional training is being provided on a monthly basis in respect of documentation and record keeping. Monthly documentation audits are now being undertaken to ensure compliance with this action and ensure the quality of record keeping is improved.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Recruit and place a permanent full-time doctor at Darley Court Intermediate Care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust recently recruited a permanent doctor to Darley Court Intermediate Care (IMC) on a full time basis and this doctor is now in post. Prior to the commencement of ████████ the medical cover had been provided by locum doctors on long term contracts. I believe this permanent arrangement will enhance communication between the medical and nursing teams and provide continuity of care for patients. The level of consultant cover has also been reviewed and it is planned to increase the number of sessions a consultant will attend Darley Court IMC from the current provision of two sessions per week.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 1 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Increase consultant attendance sessions at Darley Court Intermediate Care beyond the existing two sessions per week.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust recently recruited a permanent doctor to Darley Court Intermediate Care (IMC) on a full time basis and this doctor is now in post. Prior to the commencement of ████████ the medical cover had been provided by locum doctors on long term contracts. I believe this permanent arrangement will enhance communication between the medical and nursing teams and provide continuity of care for patients. The level of consultant cover has also been reviewed and it is planned to increase the number of sessions a consultant will attend Darley Court IMC from the current provision of two sessions per week.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 1 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Include the doctor and a senior therapy-team member in the daily morning safety huddle.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) have been developed with regard to improving the handover of information. The Daily Safety Huddle which takes place every morning now includes the doctor and a senior member of the therapy team. In addition, the senior Sister at Darley Court has been reviewing the efficiency of the handover process at the end of and commencement of a shift. Further improvements are identified these will be included in the SOP for handovers.”

    Source location

    Mollie-Bentham-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 30 December 2015

    Open published response
  8. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas Anthony Collins · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Thomas Anthony Collins lived in a care home and fell on 22 June 2015, sustaining chest injuries. He was not admitted to hospital at that time, was later admitted on 25 June, and died on 15 July 2015 after treatment for complications including sepsis, pneumonia and respiratory distress. The report raised concerns about paramedic decision-making and the GP’s assessment, including failures to recognise the seriousness of the injury and signs of a flail chest.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ascertain clinically significant chest symptoms from care staff

    Wider context from the report

    “3. On the attendance on the 24th, the doctor noted that the patient had had a fall, but she did not realise it was an unwitnessed fall, so the force and detail thereof was not known by anyone. She noted that the patient found it “was too painful for him to move or to sleep”, and she said it was “evident that he was in agony with pain for him to turn in bed” (sic). She did not ascertain from the care staff that the patient’s chest was “pulsating when breathing”, a classic sign of a flail chest. She conceded that facing the same situation now, she would have admitted him to hospital. This is clearly an area where further training is required.(Haughton Thornley Medical Centres) ”

    Source location

    Thomas Anthony Collins · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Undertake personal reading, continuing professional development, and information gathering on thoracic trauma.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Updated clinical knowledge in the area of thoracic trauma with personal reading and CPD’s will undertake personal reading and information gathering.”

    Source location

    2015-0469-Response-by-Haughton-Thornley-Medical-Centres
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 November 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Ensure all practice GPs undertake thoracic-trauma reading and attend relevant education.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• All of the practice GPs will undertake personal reading and update their clinical knowledge of thoracic trauma and management of this area, and will also attend a relevant educational meeting. At this meeting, ███████ will present the case and discuss any further changes that can be made as a result (January 2016).”

    Source location

    2015-0469-Response-by-Haughton-Thornley-Medical-Centres
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 November 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Present and discuss the incident at the relevant educational meeting to identify further changes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• All of the practice GPs will undertake personal reading and update their clinical knowledge of thoracic trauma and management of this area, and will also attend a relevant educational meeting. At this meeting, ███████ will present the case and discuss any further changes that can be made as a result (January 2016).”

    Source location

    2015-0469-Response-by-Haughton-Thornley-Medical-Centres
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 November 2015

    Open published response
  9. South and East Cumbria

    AI-generated summary

    James Edward Boylan · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    James Edward Boylan, who had a history of anxiety and was admitted to a mental health unit, died by hanging using a phone charger cord and a bathroom rail. The concerns included removable bathroom rails creating a ligature point, insufficient searching of patients’ property, access to a cord, and failures in recognising and communicating the escalation of his condition.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to maintain an overall view of escalating patient risk

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) There were numerous events over the 7 days during which Mr Boylan was present on the ward for someone with an overall view to realise that his condition was escalating and that he might become a danger to himself, but because no one person had such knowledge of all the facts, this was not recognised. It is suggested that communication be improved in any way in which the Trust thinks possible. ”

    Source location

    James Edward Boylan · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust is responsible for addressing the four concerns relating to events on the Dova Unit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note that you have also addressed your report to the Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and I would expect them to properly address the four concerns relating to events during Mr Boylan’s time on the Dova Unit at Furness General Hospital.”

    Source location

    2014-0253-Response-by-Department-of-Health
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 June 2014

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026