Recurring concern

Unreliable escalation by care staff for required medical attention

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 5 Sep 2013•Latest report 30 Jan 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes inadequate or unembedded escalation procedures and failures by care staff to obtain medical assessment or advice when deterioration, pain or a recognised condition requires it.

Not included

  • Quality of treatment after medical input was obtained
  • Routine healthcare access delays outside the care-staff escalation process
  • Generic care staffing or training concerns that do not impair clinical escalation
Reports
48

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
53

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
75

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.

Care Quality Commission7
Recipient name withheld4
Care UK2
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence2
Nursing and Midwifery Council2
Royal Sussex County Hospital2
Abbey Care Village1
Adbolton Hall1
Angel Solutions (UK) Ltd1
Belle Green Court1
Belong Limited1
Bolton Borough Council1
Bury Borough Council1
Calderdale Royal Hospital1
Cann House Care Home1

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. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Maureen Alison Woollen · 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

    Maureen Alison Woollen was discharged to Deerlands Residential Home after being identified as at high risk of falls. She was later found on the floor, developed facial bruising and reduced food and drink intake, and was admitted to hospital with an intracerebral haemorrhage, from which she died; concerns included missed opportunities to seek medical attention, inadequate care-note use, and failure to conduct a falls risk assessment on admission.

    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 promptly seek medical attention for residents who require it

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest found there were missed opportunities to conduct a falls risk assessment on Mrs Woollen's arrival to Deerlands Residential home, to seek medical attention when she was found on the floor on 3 October 2023, to seek medical attention when a bruise on her face was noted on 6 October 2023 and to monitor the progression of her bruise. I am concerned there is no process in place to ensure medical attention is promptly sought for residents who require it, that care notes are not fully utilised, especially for the recording of injury and incidents, and that falls risk assessments are not being conducted on admission. ”

    Source location

    Maureen Alison Woollen · 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

    Update admissions, falls prevention and risk-assessment policies to require timely assessment, injury monitoring and medical escalation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The admissions policy was reviewed and updated on 1 July 2024 to further outline that falls risk assessment are to be completed prior to or on admission to Sheffcare homes. This will include a”

    Source location

    Reponse from Sheffcare
    Page 4 · response
    Published 27 June 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

    Roll out refresher training on pre-admission assessments, detailed care notes, falls documentation and escalation, using anonymised scenarios and monthly monitoring.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The importance of maintaining care notes was discussed at the Deputy Managers’ meeting on 2 July 2024 [see document 9]. Sheffcare already have sophisticated Person–Centred Software, but this does not appear to have been used effectively at the time of Mrs Woollen’s care. Sheffcare has now improved the training sessions which already focus on the importance of keeping timely and accurate care notes by incorporating within the existing training real and anonymised scenarios to reinforce to staff understanding. The software includes training around ensuring a falls risk assessment is completed on admission. Falls (witnessed or otherwise) must be documented in the Person–Centred Care system and there is a monitoring and tracking section in the notes. This is audited.”

    Source location

    Reponse from Sheffcare
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 June 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

    Discuss falls, documentation and escalation requirements with staff through huddles, supervision and management briefings.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Directly after the incident with Mrs Woollen, the service met with staff at Deerland and what is known as “huddles” were carried out [see document 7]. A huddle is an informal meeting at which matters to celebrate as well as concerns are raised directly with staff. The incident with Mrs Woollen was discussed and staff were reminded of the policies in relation to falls risk, documentation, and escalation it has also been part of their mandatory training and discussed in supervisions. [see document 8].”

    Source location

    Reponse from Sheffcare
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 June 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

    Complete a quality-assurance systems review for linked care plans, risk assessments, falls escalation and care-note updating.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Subsequent to Mrs Woollen’s fall, there has also been a complete review spearheaded by Louise of the Quality Assurance Systems for the Person-Centred Care systems which links care plans and risk assessments automatically; this is audited [see document 3]. There is a three-tier approach to quality auditing headed by the Team Leader, Deputy Manager and Registered Manager who undertake quality audits which then inform the monthly quality dashboard report. [see document 4]. There has been further focus on the process at Team Leader level to capture whether falls and requirement for medical attention is being escalated appropriately. The auditing also includes analysis of whether care notes are properly updated. This review was completed on 8 July 2024.”

    Source location

    Reponse from Sheffcare
    Page 4 · response
    Published 27 June 2024

    Open published response
  2. South Wales Central

    AI-generated summary

    Clara Novella Winter · 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

    Clara Novella Winter underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy and subsequently developed an incarcerated ischaemic bowel with perforation, requiring emergency surgery. She died on 19 November 2022 after being unable to recover. Concerns were raised about post-operative care, including the timeliness of escalation and maintenance of fluid balance charts; related staff training had not been fully rolled out because of resourcing issues.

    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 ensure timely escalation by staff

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The Health Board accepted that significant learning was required by staff regarding timeliness of escalation and maintenance of fluid balance charts and recommended that all registered nurses from surgical wards should attend an ‘Acutely Unwell’ study day, before the end of 2023. 2. This ‘significant learning’ has not been fully rolled out due to resourcing issues. No completion date could be provided to me because the training is not considered to be compulsory. ”

    Source location

    Clara Novella Winter · 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

    Standardise the Acutely Unwell Course on ESR and increase monthly capacity to 25–30 training places from September 2024.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “From September 2024 the Acutely Unwell Course will be a CTM UHB standardised course available on ESR (Electronic Staff Record) for staff to book and have a larger capacity of training numbers of 25-30 spaces per month. The course is promoted via posters and staff email and all ward managers and senior nurses are encouraged to book staff members onto the course.”

    Source location

    Response from Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 31 May 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

    Promote the Acutely Unwell Course through posters and staff email and encourage ward managers and senior nurses to book staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “From September 2024 the Acutely Unwell Course will be a CTM UHB standardised course available on ESR (Electronic Staff Record) for staff to book and have a larger capacity of training numbers of 25-30 spaces per month. The course is promoted via posters and staff email and all ward managers and senior nurses are encouraged to book staff members onto the course.”

    Source location

    Response from Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 31 May 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

    Use the full outreach staffing complement to run monthly training and complete Acutely Unwell Course attendance for surgical-ward staff by the end of 2024.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Acutely Unwell Patient study day is facilitated by the outreach teams within Cwm Taf Morgannwg UHB. The course runs monthly within Prince Charles, Royal Glamorgan and Princess of Wales hospitals. Registered nurses are booked on by the ward manager. It is a one-off, non-mandatory course but it is advisable that staff complete at least every 3 years.”

    Source location

    Response from Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 31 May 2024

    Open published response
  3. Teesside and Hartlepool

    AI-generated summary

    Kate Elizabeth O’Donnell · 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

    Kate Elizabeth O’Donnell underwent surgery on 16 March 2022 and was discharged the following day. She developed sepsis from the surgery, originating in her gut, and died at James Cook University Hospital on 23 March 2022. Principal concerns included inadequate surgical planning, failure to provide appropriate prophylactic antibiotics for the gastrointestinal surgery, insufficient postoperative vigilance and assessment before discharge, incomplete nursing records, and inadequate discharge information.

    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 respond to reported pain with pain relief or medical escalation

    Wider context from the report

    “9. The nursing team did not respond to repeated statements that Kate was in pain-she was not offered pain relief nor was medical help sought. ”

    Source location

    Kate Elizabeth O’Donnell · 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

    Mandate pain assessments at every set of physiological observations through the electronic observation system.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In order to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of the assessments of our patient’s pain scores, these are now undertaken at each set of physiological observations; this”

    Source location

    Response from South Tees Hospitals
    Page 4 · response
    Published 25 January 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

    Incorporate objective pain assessment tools and visual alerts for patients reporting moderate-to-severe pain.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “is mandated as part of the electronic observation system. To enhance this further, work has been undertaken to incorporate a more detailed objective pain assessment in those patients reporting moderate to severe pain with an associated numerical score of >4. In these instances, the Abbey pain chart (measurement of pain in people with dementia who cannot verbalise) and FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) pain scale will immediately launch with a visual alert. Trust compliance with timely pain assessments and re-assessments are monitored on an ongoing basis by the Deputy Chief Nurse.”

    Source location

    Response from South Tees Hospitals
    Page 5 · response
    Published 25 January 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

    Monitor compliance with timely pain assessments and reassessments on an ongoing basis.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “is mandated as part of the electronic observation system. To enhance this further, work has been undertaken to incorporate a more detailed objective pain assessment in those patients reporting moderate to severe pain with an associated numerical score of >4. In these instances, the Abbey pain chart (measurement of pain in people with dementia who cannot verbalise) and FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) pain scale will immediately launch with a visual alert. Trust compliance with timely pain assessments and re-assessments are monitored on an ongoing basis by the Deputy Chief Nurse.”

    Source location

    Response from South Tees Hospitals
    Page 5 · response
    Published 25 January 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

    Implement the Call 4 Concern initiative, enabling patients and families to request Critical Care Outreach review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, the Trust is an early adopter of the ‘Call 4 Concern’ initiative which enables patients and their family members to contact the Trust’s Critical Care Outreach team to ask for a review if they are concerned about their own condition or that of their relative. This was implemented in November 2022, and work is ongoing within the Trust to ensure that patients and their families are aware this option is available to them.”

    Source location

    Response from South Tees Hospitals
    Page 5 · response
    Published 25 January 2024

    Open published response
  4. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Sarah CHAPPELL · 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

    Sarah Chappell was transferred to University College London Hospital on 31 May 2023 and died there on 23 June 2023. The report identified concerns about delays in transfer, failure of the appropriate clinical team to take charge, inadequate pain relief and poor communication. It also identified inappropriate management of her nasogastric tube; the inquest concluded that her care was suboptimal and that, if the tube had been managed appropriately, she would have survived this episode.

    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 escalate unsuccessful nasogastric tube placement to appropriate medical expertise

    Wider context from the report

    “5. The management of the nasogastric tube that was crucial in attempting to avoid a fatal aspiration was inappropriate. The tube in situ that was operating effectively was removed approximately ten days before her death. Her abdomen became extremely distended. A further tube placement was not attempted until the day before she died. When this proved beyond the nurses’ skillset, a doctor was not called to assist until the following afternoon. By then, two experienced doctors were unable to insert a tube and, as they were attending her (with her mother present), their patient suffered a massive aspiration and died shortly afterwards. I was told at inquest that if the nasogastric tube had been passed at an earlier point, this would have been done successfully and the fatal cardiac arrest would have been avoided. ”

    Source location

    Sarah CHAPPELL · 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

    Update the nasogastric-tube policy to cover surgical drainage and escalation of difficult or unsuccessful tube placement.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ms Chappell was admitted to UCLH with a nasogastric (NG) tube from PRUH on 1st June 2023. The NG tube was removed on 10th June 2023 due to low drainage volume which is appropriate practice. A NG tube can be uncomfortable for patients and prolonged placement can cause inflammation of the oesophagus. We therefore remove them if they are not required. Following a scan on 22nd June there was a request for a new, larger NG to be inserted. Nasogastric tube insertion can be difficult and not predictable as to which in patients such insertion may succeed. However, we recognise there were multiple attempts to insert the larger NG tube and that there were failings in the escalation of a difficult NG tube insertion.”

    Source location

    Response from University College London Hospitals
    Page 6 · response
    Published 19 December 2023

    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

    UCLH states the NG tube was removed appropriately because drainage was low, and that subsequent insertion was inherently difficult and unpredictable.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ms Chappell was admitted to UCLH with a nasogastric (NG) tube from PRUH on 1st June 2023. The NG tube was removed on 10th June 2023 due to low drainage volume which is appropriate practice. A NG tube can be uncomfortable for patients and prolonged placement can cause inflammation of the oesophagus. We therefore remove them if they are not required. Following a scan on 22nd June there was a request for a new, larger NG to be inserted. Nasogastric tube insertion can be difficult and not predictable as to which in patients such insertion may succeed. However, we recognise there were multiple attempts to insert the larger NG tube and that there were failings in the escalation of a difficult NG tube insertion.”

    Source location

    Response from University College London Hospitals
    Page 6 · response
    Published 19 December 2023

    Open published response
  5. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    June Peel · 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

    June Peel, a resident at Belle Green Court Care Home, sustained a displaced distal femur fracture that was not identified or medically assessed promptly. She underwent surgery after admission to hospital and did not recover, dying on a palliative care pathway. The principal concerns were failures to follow her care plan, record and hand over information about her knee injury, and seek timely medical attention.

    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 recognise when medical attention is required

    Wider context from the report

    “2. There was a failure to recognise that medical attention was required for June from at least 3rd June 2022, notwithstanding all personal care being conducted by the healthcare assistants. ”

    Source location

    June Peel · 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 a Referral for Medical Attention policy requiring prompt clinical referral, documented professional guidance, care-plan updates and recorded follow-up.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Action Taken We have implemented a new policy ‘Referral for Medical Attention’. Staff must not exercise their judgement as to whether urgent referral/ treatment is required or whether assessment can be delayed. The policy requires that”

    Source location

    Response from Belle Green Court Care Home
    Page 10 · response
    Published 4 August 2025

    Open published response
  6. Worcestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Peter Antony Joseph Pearson · 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

    Mr Peter Antony Joseph Pearson died at Worcester Royal Hospital on 6 December 2021 from aspiration pneumonia, which was in all probability acquired while he was resident at Corbett House Nursing Home. Concerns included a delay in calling an ambulance despite his critical condition, incomplete nursing and medication records, failures in oral-cavity checks, shortcomings in management oversight, and an ineffective investigation into his death.

    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

    Delays in calling an ambulance when a resident’s condition requires emergency assistance

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Mr Pearson’s condition on 5 December 2021 was such that his daughter asked the agency nurse on duty for an ambulance to be called at 12.30 pm. None was called until 6.10 pm. The nurse did not complete the nursing notes for the day from 5am onwards so there is no written record of Mr Pearson’s medical condition that day. Mr Pearson was found by paramedics alone in his room in a critical state. The staff on duty knew very little about him or his condition. No record of medications dispensed to Mr Pearson that day has been lost or is missing. He was found with medication in his mouth by paramedics. No records were kept of the checks of his oral cavity that were required to be undertaken twice a day. The Agency nurse has not been traced by the Home. The inquest found as a fact that the failure to call an ambulance earlier amounted to a missed opportunity. ”

    Source location

    Mr Peter Antony Joseph Pearson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. Sefton St Helens & Knowsley

    AI-generated summary

    Joan RICHARDSON · 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 RICHARDSON, a frail 98-year-old woman living in supported accommodation, became increasingly unwell at home and was admitted to hospital on 4 May 2020. She had pneumonia, a fractured neck of femur and grade 4 sacral pressure wounds, and died in hospital on 18 May 2020. Concerns included failures to escalate her deterioration and pain, incomplete care planning and risk assessments, inadequate pressure-area care and documentation, and inadequate staff training and escalation procedures.

    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 escalate patients’ deterioration and pain

    Wider context from the report

    “(brief summary of matters of concern) Joan had only started to receive care at home four times per day from lunch time of 29/04/2020, however when Joan failed to get up from her bed, refused food and fluids, complained of pain and generally started to deteriorate;- 1. The matter of Joan’s general deterioration was not escalated as it should have been to her GP/District Nurse/Commissioning Social Services etc. 2. When Joan complained of pain -the matter was not escalated as it should have been. 3. There was no comprehensive plan of care, risk assessment, pressure area care plan/risk assessment, falls assessment and care plan put in place following assessment by Litch care services. The manager/proprietor ████████ Registered manager informed the court they were still in the process of doing risk assessment/s etc because Joan was only receiving their care for 4.5 days before she was admitted to hospital. 4. Joan was admitted to hospital with Grade 4 pressure ulcers/tissue injuries to her sacrum, but because Joan had refused much of the personal care offered to her and she had remained largely immobile in bed the pressure sores/tissue injuries were not documented, assessed or managed as they should have been nor was the tissue viability nurse, GP, District nurse or social care team informed to enable them to commence/prescribe appropriate treatment. 5. There were no records/daily log making any mention of skin integrity/breakdown even though Joan was in bed, frail, immobile and incontinent in addition to which because Joan was refusing care her incontinence pad were not being changed regularly. 6. Training/education, support & supervision of care staff including the provision of clear escalation procedures was inadequate. Noting care staff attended upon Joan regularly as required. ”

    Source location

    Joan RICHARDSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Maria Howell · 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

    Maria Howell, a resident of Cranham Court Nursing Home, died in hospital on 28 September 2019 after her RIG tube fell out, reinsertion was delayed, and she later developed peritonitis. The concerns were that the care home lacked qualified nursing staff to reinsert a time-critical RIG tube and that staff did not recognise the need for urgent medical attention when she became critically ill.

    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 staff clinical judgement to recognise the need for urgent medical attention in critically ill people

    Wider context from the report

    “That the Care Home had a resident with specific complex needs, and they had no qualified nursing staff to reinsert a RIG tube which is time critical. That they employ staff whose clinical judgement on someone who is critically ill does not necessitate urgent medical attention. ”

    Source location

    Maria Howell · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  9. South London

    AI-generated summary

    John Willis Humphries · 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

    John Willis Humphries was admitted to hospital with abdominal pain and developed pressure sores, which deteriorated during his stay. He was later readmitted, developed recurrent urinary tract infections associated with catheterisation, and died from pulmonary oedema and pneumonia. Concerns included the absence of reported skin integrity assessments or measures in the Emergency Department and the failure to seek advice on managing his resistance to repositioning.

    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 seek guidance on managing resistance to turning

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) When Mr Humphries resisted being turned, no advice was sought from external professionals or the nursing home as to how to manage the situation. The nursing home in particular had effectively employed a range of strategies to deal with the situation and would have been able to provide guidance had the staff been contacted. ”

    Source location

    John Willis Humphries · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    KENNETH SMITH · 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 Smith, who had cognitive impairment and was at high risk of falls, died on 9 November 2020 after falling at a care home and developing acute-on-chronic subdural haematomas. The report raised concerns about reducing his supervision, failing to set a review date, inadequate escalation of care after further falls, and insufficient consideration of medication and mental-health factors in assessing his falls risk.

    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

    Delay in seeking mental health practitioner advice for progressive agitation

    Wider context from the report

    “After a proposed re-assessment of the falls risk posed by the deceased on the 22nd of October 2020 the 14-day period expired on the 22nd and 29th of October established that the deceased was to suffer 6 falls between the 22nd and 29th of October 2020. Two of these falls took place on the 22nd of October 2020 – the same date of the reduction in the level of care being offered. The evidence from the care home indicated that there was no date that had been given for a future review. It was also accepted that there was no action taken to consider whether any fall or falls resulted in the Accident Record including no action taken on the 29th of October 2020 when the deceased suffered two falls, resulting in tears and a head injury. Additionally, the evidence established that on release from hospital to the care home on the 6th of October 2020, the discharge clinicians had stopped the prescription of Trazodone due to its known sedative qualities. There was no evidence of this (as part of the falls risk assessment) being taken into account by carers adequately, or at all. Care staff had only escalated concerns over the deceased's progressive agitation to a general practitioner on 30th of October 2020. This had resulted in a referral to the Older Persons' Mental Health Team. There was no evidence as to why further advice from a mental health practitioner was not sought earlier, or as part of the risk assessment on the 22nd of October 2020. The nature and quality of the care received by the deceased between the 22nd and 31st of October 2020 reveal the following concerns: 1. The decision to reduce the level of supervision was suboptimal, incorrect and unlawful. 2. The failure to consider and specify a review date; 3. The lack of appropriate scaling up of care to meet identified problems or issues with the reduced level of care, with no prompt to act on urgent review. 4. Care plan guidance, whilst not triggered, was serious or untoward incidents review by the care home, the CCG, or local authority; ”

    Source location

    KENNETH SMITH · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026