Recurring concern

Unsafe remote clinical consultations for assessment and advice

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 24 Mar 2014•Latest report 6 Aug 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of remote clinical consultations, including telephone or virtual consultations, where inadequate assessment, insufficiently thorough questioning, unreliable patient-provided information or failure to check understanding can make clinical advice or decisions unsafe.

Not included

  • Excludes face-to-face consultation failures where remote consultation is not the deficient process.
  • Excludes failures confined to a named pathway, such as telephone mental health assessment, GP appointment triage or emergency call handling, where that named pathway supplies the more specific supported boundary.
  • Excludes generic communication, documentation or follow-up deficiencies unless they directly impair the safety of a remote clinical consultation.
  • Excludes failures occurring after a remote consultation has been adequately completed, including subsequent treatment or service-access failures.
Reports
8

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
10

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
7

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 Care5
NHS England3
Association of Ambulance Chief Executives1
East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust1
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust1
Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust1
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust1
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board1
NHS North East Hampshire and Farnham Clinical Commissioning Group1
North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust1
Royal College of Psychiatrists1
Royal College of Surgeons of England1
Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust1

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 North London

    AI-generated summary

    Jacob Matthew WOODERSON · 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

    Jacob Wooderson, who was being treated with Elvanse for ADHD, increased his dosage to 70 mg in August 2024 and subsequently experienced poor sleep and exhaustion before collapsing and dying at home on 23 August 2024. The inquest recorded sudden arrhythmic death syndrome, with Elvanse treatment for ADHD as a contributing factor, although the precise cause of the arrhythmia could not be established. Concerns included inadequate monitoring and documentation of heart rate, blood pressure and medication advice, particularly following dosage increases and during remote consultations.

    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

    Reliance on unreliable patient-provided heart rate and blood pressure observations in remote consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “3) The practice of remote consultations may mean that prescribers are reliant upon patients providing heart rate and blood pressure data outside of the consultation. Consequently, there is the potential for clinical decisions to be based on unreliable observations. ”

    Source location

    Jacob Matthew WOODERSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Prescribers, not the Department, decide whether medicines can be safely prescribed and must account for relevant national clinical guidance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ultimately, decisions about what medicines to prescribe are made by the doctor or healthcare professional responsible for that part of the patient’s care, and prescribers are accountable for their prescribing decisions. Prescribers must always satisfy themselves that the medicines they consider appropriate for their patients can be safely prescribed and that they take account of appropriate national guidance on clinical effectiveness – as detailed for ADHD management and Elvanse specifically in the above paragraphs. Prescribers are supported by specialist professional bodies (e.g. Royal Colleges) and held to account professionally by professional regulators, such as the General Medical Council (GMC).”

    Source location

    Response from Department for Health and Social Care
    Page 4 · response
    Published 28 August 2025

    Open published response
  2. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Kim Jeannette ROBINSON · 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

    Kim Robinson died at home in Suffolk on 12 May 2024 after toxicological analysis identified a significantly toxic level of a medication obtained from an online pharmacy. The report identified concerns that the online prescriber could not access her GP records, the ordering process used incorrect details, and the medication was delivered in a quantity that gave her direct access to a fatal amount. The report stated that the online prescription system needed review.

    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 of online prescribers to access patients’ records during consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Following Kim’s tragic death the GP who had prescribed the prescription of ████████ to Kim, reviewed the current online system in place and identified five areas where in his evidence he identified changes could be made. The GP stated there was:- a) The need for online prescribers to be able to access a patient’s records (at least the Summary Care Records). These records could be attached to the consultation for review by the prescriber. b) All patients could be asked for consent to share the details of their prescriptions with their current GP and/or regular practitioner. When consent is given, it was suggested a notice should be sent to these healthcare providers at the same time the medicine is delivered to the patient. Without such consent, the patient’s order should not be accepted. c) Prescribers could have the ability to add comments when reviewing a consultation, whether it is approved or vetoed. d) All consultations could include the question: “Have you ever had suicidal behaviour or thoughts?” e) Prescriptions could be also for smaller quantities, taking into account the possible lethal dose of the medicine. If necessary, dispensing should be limited to weekly or reduced frequencies. Had these features been present on the on-line system, the GP stated he would not have issued a prescription of ████████ to Kim. In light of the evidence heard in this case I believe the current system of on-line prescription service needs to be reviewed. 2. It is of note, that the matter of concern regarding the ease in obtaining online prescriptions was previously raised by this court on 15th November 2019 in a Prevention of Future Death report following the tragic death of Deborah Headspeath on 3rd August 2017. ”

    Source location

    Kim Jeannette ROBINSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · 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 to assess suicidal behaviour or thoughts in online consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Following Kim’s tragic death the GP who had prescribed the prescription of ████████ to Kim, reviewed the current online system in place and identified five areas where in his evidence he identified changes could be made. The GP stated there was:- a) The need for online prescribers to be able to access a patient’s records (at least the Summary Care Records). These records could be attached to the consultation for review by the prescriber. b) All patients could be asked for consent to share the details of their prescriptions with their current GP and/or regular practitioner. When consent is given, it was suggested a notice should be sent to these healthcare providers at the same time the medicine is delivered to the patient. Without such consent, the patient’s order should not be accepted. c) Prescribers could have the ability to add comments when reviewing a consultation, whether it is approved or vetoed. d) All consultations could include the question: “Have you ever had suicidal behaviour or thoughts?” e) Prescriptions could be also for smaller quantities, taking into account the possible lethal dose of the medicine. If necessary, dispensing should be limited to weekly or reduced frequencies. Had these features been present on the on-line system, the GP stated he would not have issued a prescription of ████████ to Kim. In light of the evidence heard in this case I believe the current system of on-line prescription service needs to be reviewed. 2. It is of note, that the matter of concern regarding the ease in obtaining online prescriptions was previously raised by this court on 15th November 2019 in a Prevention of Future Death report following the tragic death of Deborah Headspeath on 3rd August 2017. ”

    Source location

    Kim Jeannette ROBINSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · 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

    If an appropriate organisation requires a standardised suicidal-behaviour question, the GPhC would monitor its inclusion through inspections.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In your report you suggest that all consultations could include the question: “Have you ever had suicidal behaviour or thoughts?” On this point, the GPhC expects pharmacies to carry out a risk assessment for every part of the service they provide. If an appropriate organisation stated that this question should be included, then the GPhC would monitor this through its inspection processes.”

    Source location

    Response from DHSC
    Page 3 · response
    Published 31 January 2025

    Open published response
  3. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    WILLIAM BRIAN KIN GRAY · 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

    William had poorly controlled asthma and experienced a life-threatening asthma attack on 29 May 2021, followed by respiratory and cardiac arrest and a brain injury not compatible with life. The report identified multiple concerns, including failures to assess, review, escalate and treat his asthma, ambulance treatment and airway-management issues, gaps in investigation and training, and limitations in asthma and emergency-care services.

    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 involve children directly in asthma service consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “(6) The Asthma & Allergy Childrens and Young Persons Service (the Service) a. At the time of William’s initial referral to the Service in 2018 this consisted of one nurse for approximately 2000 children, and this increased to two nurses in November 2020. The evidence heard is that whilst the number of nurses has increased so has the geographical area that the Service covers, and that there are ongoing plans to increase this further. The Service remains under resourced whilst attempting to expand. b. The Service continued to operate during the pandemic and did not introduce video calls when they could not make face-to-face attendances. There was no risk assessment of the impact on the Service, and no audit of whether this was sufficient to manage the Service. There is no contingency plan in place should this issue arise again. c. The Service relied on telephone contact Nurses did not speak to William although he was old enough to be involved in his care. ”

    Source location

    WILLIAM BRIAN KIN GRAY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 5 · 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

    Request to speak with children during consultations and record their views in the electronic patient record.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Response: Current practice is to ensure all nurses request to speak with the child, if they are old enough, at all consultations - whether this is via telephone or video. During face to face clinic”

    Source location

    Response from Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 12 December 2023

    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

    Require nurses to speak with sufficiently mature children and record children’s views in electronic patient records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Response: Current practice is to ensure all nurses request to speak with the child, if they are old enough, at all consultations - whether this is via telephone or video. During face to face clinic”

    Source location

    Response from Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 12 December 2023

    Open published response
  4. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Holden · 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

    Mark Thomas Holden was diagnosed with Covid-19 and subsequently developed a deep vein thrombosis in his left calf, which led to a pulmonary embolus. He collapsed at home on 26 February 2021 and attempts to resuscitate him were unsuccessful. Concerns included the lack of a face-to-face GP examination, failure of the electronic system to alert staff to a markedly raised D-Dimer, and NICE guidance not addressing Covid-19-related clotting risks.

    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 provide physical examination during telephone GP consultations where clinically needed

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The appointment with the GP was via telephone due to Covid. As a result, there was no examination of Mr Holden and no opportunity to identify the DVT which was present at the time of the telephone consultation. ”

    Source location

    Mark Holden · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Stanislaw Wieslaw ZIELINSKI · 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

    Stanislaw Wieslaw Zielinski’s mental health deteriorated after he reported anxiety and insomnia, with care provided through telephone GP appointments and delays in mental health support. On 20 October 2020, he fell from an upstairs window and sustained multiple fractures and a subdural haematoma; he later died from a cardiac arrest due to a pulmonary embolism following hospitalisation and surgery. The concerns included difficulties communicating his deteriorating condition through telephone consultations and delays in receiving mental health support during the Covid-19 period.

    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 of GP consultation arrangements to support effective communication about deteriorating health

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Pre Covid Mr Zielinski would have been seen face to face rather than through a series of telephone consultations. The inquest heard that he and his family struggled to communicate with the GP to explain his deteriorating health position as a result of how his GP practice was delivering health care. The inquest heard evidence that as a consequence his deteriorating picture was not fully understood by his GP and he was additional anxious as a result of an inability to express his concerns in person. ”

    Source location

    Stanislaw Wieslaw ZIELINSKI · 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

    Review patient experience feedback monthly to identify poor primary-care experiences and access inequalities.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Work is also ongoing to understand negative patient experiences of primary care so that we can mitigate and reduce similar incidents going forward by sharing the learning across all general practices within Tameside and Glossop. This work involves reviewing appointment data on a”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Tameside-Metropolitan-Borough-Tameside-and-Glossop-CCG_Published.pdf
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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

    Discuss negative patient feedback with relevant practices to support learning and improvement.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “monthly basis in conjunction with any feedback from patients highlighting poor experiences. We then have conversations with practices regarding those poor experiences to support learning and improvement across all general practice within Tameside and Glossop. As such we encourage all patients to share their experiences – positive as well as negative – to reduce any inequality of access.”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Tameside-Metropolitan-Borough-Tameside-and-Glossop-CCG_Published.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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

    Introduce six-monthly patient surveys at individual practices from October 2021 to assess primary-care access and delivery.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the planned update to Locally Commissioned Services, delivered by general practice, and to further support practice reflection on whether each individual practice has the appropriate blend of face to face and telephone consultations for their individual patient lists, from 1 October 2021, practices will survey their patients and clinicians every six months to understand how both parties experience delivering primary care during the ongoing and evolving pandemic. Tameside and Glossop CCG has been working to improve patient experience and access throughout the pandemic and will implement an action plan as part of this work that will also respond to the concerns raised by this Prevention of Future Deaths letter. Due to the nature of the available data this will be a rolling, ongoing action plan involving continual review of data and experiences.”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Tameside-Metropolitan-Borough-Tameside-and-Glossop-CCG_Published.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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 an individual practice clinician survey in October 2021 to assess primary-care delivery during the pandemic.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the planned update to Locally Commissioned Services, delivered by general practice, and to further support practice reflection on whether each individual practice has the appropriate blend of face to face and telephone consultations for their individual patient lists, from 1 October 2021, practices will survey their patients and clinicians every six months to understand how both parties experience delivering primary care during the ongoing and evolving pandemic. Tameside and Glossop CCG has been working to improve patient experience and access throughout the pandemic and will implement an action plan as part of this work that will also respond to the concerns raised by this Prevention of Future Deaths letter. Due to the nature of the available data this will be a rolling, ongoing action plan involving continual review of data and experiences.”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Tameside-Metropolitan-Borough-Tameside-and-Glossop-CCG_Published.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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

    National general practice guidance required remote triage and face-to-face appointments where clinically appropriate, addressing concerns about remote-only care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since the advent of the Covid-19 pandemic general practice has been delivering health care services according to the national General Practice in the Context of Coronavirus Standard Operating Procedure that has been regularly updated. This national guidance was in force at the time of Mr Zielinski’s death. The aim of this Standard Operating Procedure was to ensure general practice was able to provide health care to patients in a safe environment, limiting the opportunity of Covid-19 infections in staff and patients while reducing the number of absences either by infections or self-isolation.”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published.pdf
    Page 1 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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

    The CCG cannot determine how GP consultations are undertaken because it lacks legal powers and is not party to the nationally negotiated contract.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Nonetheless, whilst the CCG seeks to raise and maintain high standards it has no legal powers to determine how such consultations are undertaken. The contract with GPs – which is negotiated nationally and which the CCG isn’t actually a party to – doesn’t allow for specifying how consultations are delivered. At best the CCG can share data, share best practice and share any negative feedback with practices to understand why it has been received and encouraging changes that may want to consider to improve patient care and/or lived experience.”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Tameside-Metropolitan-Borough-Tameside-and-Glossop-CCG_Published.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    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

    Existing guidance, procedures and resources are considered sufficient to support safe remote general practice consultations alongside face-to-face appointments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Throughout the pandemic, NHS England and NHS Improvement (NHSEI) provided guidance to general practice and continually updated standard operating procedures to ensure that changing services could operate safely. NHSEI set out clear expectations that general practices offer face to face appointments alongside remote appointments (telephone and online), and that clinical appropriateness and patient preference should be taken into account to determine the most appropriate consultation method. NHSEI has also supported general practices in how best to”

    Source location

    2021-0277-Response-from-Department-of-Health-Social-Care_Published.pdf
    Page 1 · response
    Published 26 August 2021

    Open published response
  6. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas Rawnsley · 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 Rawnsley, a residential nursing home resident, developed a chest infection, later collapsed at the home and died in hospital on 4 February 2015. Concerns included the quality of safety-netting advice, the risks of telephone consultations and incomplete information during clinical triage, and inaccuracies or omissions when paramedic advice was transferred to patient information leaflets.

    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 provide written follow-up of advice from virtual consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Primary care are undertaking more and more virtual consultations with patients and the advice that is provided is inherently more risky over the phone with GPs not being in a strong position to assess the patients understanding of the advice that has been given in the same way as they can when the patient is sitting in front of them in the practice. This advice is not followed up in writing and therefore it may be misinterpreted or incorrectly passed from one care team to another in the event of someone, like Thomas, is having his care delivered by professional carers. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Rawnsley · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · 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 to assess patients’ understanding of advice during virtual consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Primary care are undertaking more and more virtual consultations with patients and the advice that is provided is inherently more risky over the phone with GPs not being in a strong position to assess the patients understanding of the advice that has been given in the same way as they can when the patient is sitting in front of them in the practice. This advice is not followed up in writing and therefore it may be misinterpreted or incorrectly passed from one care team to another in the event of someone, like Thomas, is having his care delivered by professional carers. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Rawnsley · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · 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

    Routine written follow-up after every remote primary-care consultation is considered disproportionate; follow-up should be based on clinical judgment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In light of the above we consider it would be disproportionate to routinely require the provision of written follow up information following any and every remote consultation in primary care but that this should be based on any clinical judgement.”

    Source location

    2020-0283-Response-from-NHS-National-Medical-Director-Redacted
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 January 2021

    Open published response
  7. Sunderland

    AI-generated summary

    Raymond Henry Davidson (Raymond) · 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

    Raymond Henry Davidson died at home on 10 June 2017 after ambulance responses to urgent and emergency calls did not attend before he stopped breathing. The report identified ongoing ambulance resource shortages and delays in responding to urgent cases, as well as concerns that the initial clinical review was not sufficiently robust because telephone contact was not made directly with Raymond.

    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 make direct telephone contact with the patient during initial clinical review

    Wider context from the report

    “I heard evidence that: - • the recruitment/retention of staff had improved; and • welfare calls triggered earlier clinician involvement than previously; and • although there were several other initiatives under way, operational shortages were ongoing. Raymond’s death highlighted resource issues. There was only so much NEAS could do when they simply did not have enough ambulances to send. At times demand was greater than the resources NEAS had available. The effect of urgent cases being interposed put back those cases appearing to be less urgent. In this case: - • 10 hours 51 minutes elapsed from the original 111 call; • 8 hours and 29 minutes after the urgent categorisation; and • 1 hour 3 minutes after the case was prioritised as a G2 response. This is the third such report about the same issue that I have written in recent months as I consider that there is a risk of future deaths. An urgent review of resources and their application is needed. Finally from the evidence, there was frequent telephone contact made, but this was not with the patient directly, which may have impacted on the less than robust initial clinical review of Raymond’s condition. ”

    Source location

    Raymond Henry Davidson (Raymond) · 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 the updated Urgent Ringback Procedure, prioritising direct conversation with patients wherever possible, and communicate it to relevant staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I can confirm that the updated ‘Urgent Ringback Procedure’ was approved and implemented in February 2018. The updated procedure is available and communicated onto all Call Handlers, Clinicians and Team Leaders within the Trusts Emergency Operations Centre. The new procedure puts the emphasis on direct conversation with the patient wherever possible. In relation to the 111 Clinician, the individual was provided one-to-one feedback on this case and undertook a coaching session.”

    Source location

    2018-0059-North-East-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 8 June 2018

    Open published response
  8. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Phyllis Barnes · 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

    Phyllis Barnes underwent elective laparoscopic anterior resection and was discharged home, but developed persistent vomiting and became increasingly unwell. She was later readmitted with an anastomotic leak and died from complications. Concerns included delayed recognition of the seriousness of her symptoms, a superficial nurse-led telephone consultation with uncertain follow-up, and a lack of formal communication with her daughter.

    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

    Superficial and perfunctory nurse-led telephone consultations for enhanced recovery after laparoscopic surgery

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Inappropriate nurse-led telephone consultation for the enhanced recovery programme for laparoscopic surgery appears to have been superficial and perfunctory with doubts over a further telephone follow-up as promised ”

    Source location

    Phyllis Barnes · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026