Recurring concern

Unreliable post-fall assessment and clinical response

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 3 Dec 2013•Latest report 30 Mar 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of controls specifically dedicated to post-fall care, including immediate assessment, medication review, neurological observations, clinical direction, medical review, injury escalation, monitoring and handover following a patient fall.

Not included

  • Excludes pre-fall falls-risk assessment and prevention measures unless the report also identifies a post-fall assessment or response failure.
  • Excludes generic clinical review, escalation or documentation deficiencies not specifically connected to care after a patient fall.
  • Excludes delays in ambulance attendance or hospital admission where no post-fall clinical assessment or response deficiency is identified.
  • Excludes unrelated medication-review failures outside the post-fall care process.
Reports
44

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
57

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
76

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 Commission4
Barts Health NHS Trust2
Royal London Hospital2
Whittington Health NHS Trust2
Alexandra Rose Residential Care Home1
Barchester Healthcare Limited1
Blenheim House1
Bourne House, Old Sarum1
Bupa Care Homes1
Bupa UK Provision1
Care4u Health Care Limited1
Care First Class (UK) Limited1
Charing Healthcare Ltd1
City of Doncaster Council1
County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation 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. Gloucestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Graham Philip Jones · 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

    Graham Philip Jones, a 63-year-old man with significant medical conditions, was admitted to hospital with vomiting and abdominal pain and underwent repair of a perforated duodenal ulcer. He suffered several falls in hospital, including a fall that caused a significant head injury; the injury was diagnosed after a delay, and he died on 13 April 2018. The principal concerns related to falls prevention, adherence to the post-falls protocol, review of medication after a fall, and the handover of safety information between wards.

    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 understanding that post-fall medical reviews must include review of current medications

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Whether sufficient consideration is given to falls prevention measures on the surgical ward, 2. Whether there is sufficient understanding of the post falls protocol that must be followed on the surgical ward, 3. Whether there is sufficient understanding that a medical review of a patient post fall must include review of their current medications, 4. When a patient is transferred between wards, whether there is sufficient handover of safety information pertaining to a patient. ”

    Source location

    Graham Philip Jones · 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

    Insufficient understanding of the post-falls protocol on the surgical ward

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Whether sufficient consideration is given to falls prevention measures on the surgical ward, 2. Whether there is sufficient understanding of the post falls protocol that must be followed on the surgical ward, 3. Whether there is sufficient understanding that a medical review of a patient post fall must include review of their current medications, 4. When a patient is transferred between wards, whether there is sufficient handover of safety information pertaining to a patient. ”

    Source location

    Graham Philip Jones · 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

    Redraft the post-fall assessment sticker to require consideration of low-dose prophylactic anticoagulants.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “After the inquest the Trust has reviewed the medical contribution to post falls management and, in particular, the inpatient post falls assessment sticker. Although this sticker is an effective tool for standardising medical post falls care and assessment, the Trust’s conclusion is that this could be improved. Analysis of Mr Jones’ drug chart shows that he was prescribed a daily dose of anticoagulant in the form of a prophylactic dose of Dalteparin. Despite this, on the post falls assessment stickers the reviewing doctor has answered ‘No’ to the question ‘is the patient on anticoagulation’. The Trust proposes to undertake some work to address the fact that low dose prophylactic anticoagulants in the form that Mr Jones received must be included in this medical assessment, and instructions given to nursing staff as to whether this medication should be continued or stopped.”

    Source location

    2019-0131-Response-by-Gloucestershire-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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 training and instructions to doctors and nursing staff on assessing and managing prophylactic anticoagulants after falls.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “After the inquest the Trust has reviewed the medical contribution to post falls management and, in particular, the inpatient post falls assessment sticker. Although this sticker is an effective tool for standardising medical post falls care and assessment, the Trust’s conclusion is that this could be improved. Analysis of Mr Jones’ drug chart shows that he was prescribed a daily dose of anticoagulant in the form of a prophylactic dose of Dalteparin. Despite this, on the post falls assessment stickers the reviewing doctor has answered ‘No’ to the question ‘is the patient on anticoagulation’. The Trust proposes to undertake some work to address the fact that low dose prophylactic anticoagulants in the form that Mr Jones received must be included in this medical assessment, and instructions given to nursing staff as to whether this medication should be continued or stopped.”

    Source location

    2019-0131-Response-by-Gloucestershire-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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

    Train Trust nursing staff in falls assessment, prevention, documentation and post-fall management, with mandatory and educational refreshers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “All Trust nursing staff are trained locally in their ward areas on the use of Trust policy and documentation connected with falls assessment, preventative measures and the protocol for managing a patient following a fall. These are regularly refreshed by mandatory training and other educational opportunities.”

    Source location

    2019-0131-Response-by-Gloucestershire-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    Open published response
  2. Milton Keynes

    AI-generated summary

    Douglas Albert Walter MINNS · 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

    Douglas Albert Walter MINNS, aged 93, fell at home on 21 August 2018 and made an emergency call. He was attended by ambulance after approximately four hours, taken to hospital with subarachnoid and subdural bleeding, and died there on 22 August 2018. The principal concern was the withdrawal of a falls service and the resulting delay in responding to people who had fallen, particularly amid strains on the ambulance service.

    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

    Unavailability of a home-based falls response service

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the evidence it was explained to me that the provision of a falls service was withdrawn some years ago, the service would provide for someone to attend the home of the person who had fallen, get them on their feet, assess their wellbeing, serve a cup of tea and get them back into bed if required. If they required more urgent treatment, they would report to the ambulance service. The withdrawal of the service puts patient's lives at risk and, in view of the strains on the ambulance service, consideration should be given to re-introducing it. It is unacceptable for a 93 year old man to be left lying on the floor for four hours before someone responds. ”

    Source location

    Douglas Albert Walter MINNS · 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

    Operate a 24/7 Home 1st Rapids service providing rapid triage, home attendance, assessment and escalation for acute falls.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• A Home 1st Rapids service provided by our community provider, CNWL, comprising of experienced nurse practitioners and prescribers, who respond to a call from a GP, ambulance services or other allied health professional.”

    Source location

    2019-0052-Response-by-Milton-Keynes-CCG
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2019

    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 commissioned services sufficiently replace the discontinued falls service, covering acute, preventative and non-urgent community fall needs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I hope the above description of commissioned services provides suitable assurance that although the original falls services was discontinued, it has been replaced by a 24/7 Home 1st Rapids service to deal with acute episodes of falling in the community; supported by two in office hours services which focus on prevention and non-urgent needs. The Home 1st Rapids service reflects the objectives of the original falls service in that they attend the home, carry out an assessment, make the individual comfortable and call an ambulance if required.”

    Source location

    2019-0052-Response-by-Milton-Keynes-CCG
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2019

    Open published response
  3. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Georgia Polydorou · 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

    Georgia Polydorou was an in-patient being treated for congestive cardiac failure when she fell while going to the toilet on 10 July 2017. She later became unresponsive and was found to have a large acute subdural haematoma; after surgery and a prolonged period on a ventilator, she died on 18 September 2017. Concerns included the decision not to perform a CT scan within eight hours of the fall despite concurrent use of aspirin, clopidogrel and enoxaparin, the delayed presentation of head-injury signs in elderly patients, and communication difficulties relating to her limited English and the significance of headache after the fall.

    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 the significance of post-fall deterioration signs to patients’ interpreters or carers

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Mrs Polydorou’s first language was Greek. Witnesses described her ability to converse in English as “basic”. Whilst in A&E, her son acted as an interpreter in order to obtain a reliable history. Following the fall, it was decided that Mrs Polydorou would have a CT scan if she showed signs of deterioration such as headache, bleeding, dizziness or vomiting. Mrs Polydorou’s son, ████████ was told that his mother had fallen but was not told of the significance that may indicate that her condition was deteriorating. During a visit on 10 July, Mrs Polydorou told her son that she had a headache but he did not realise the potential significance of this. Mrs Polydorou did not report her headache to medical staff. ”

    Source location

    Georgia Polydorou · 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 provide timely CT scanning after falls in elderly patients taking blood-thinning medications

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Mrs Polydorou did not receive a CT scan within 8 hours of her fall because she had a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15/15, she did not have any abnormal neurological observations and was not taking Warfarin. Mrs Polydorou was concurrently taking aspirin, clopidogrel and enoxaparin during her hospital admission. All of which have the effect of thinning the blood. (2) Evidence from a consultant neurosurgeon established that there can be a significant delay in elderly patients showing signs of head injury following a fall, particularly where they are taking blood thinning medications. ”

    Source location

    Georgia Polydorou · 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

    Log the concerns with the NICE guideline surveillance team for consideration in ongoing surveillance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following our considerations, we believe both guidelines appropriately reflect the available evidence and do not need to be amended at this time. Nevertheless, the issues have been logged with the NICE guideline surveillance team, and will be taken into account when the guideline areas are next considered for review.”

    Source location

    2018-0079-Response-by-N.I.C.E
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 June 2018

    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

    Take the issues into account when the relevant guideline areas are next reviewed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following our considerations, we believe both guidelines appropriately reflect the available evidence and do not need to be amended at this time. Nevertheless, the issues have been logged with the NICE guideline surveillance team, and will be taken into account when the guideline areas are next considered for review.”

    Source location

    2018-0079-Response-by-N.I.C.E
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 June 2018

    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 VTE and head-injury guidelines appropriately reflect available evidence and do not require amendment at this time.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We also have a guideline on the assessment and early management of head injury (CG176). This guideline includes recommendations on performing CT head scans in patients on warfarin (who have no other indications for CT head scan), reflecting the available evidence. The guideline developers considered there to be limited evidence regarding patients using other antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs within studies deriving or validating clinical decision rules for determining which patients need CT head scans - particularly, evidence in determining whether they are at increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage. The guideline developers therefore made a research recommendation on this issue.”

    Source location

    2018-0079-Response-by-N.I.C.E
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 June 2018

    Open published response
  4. Birmingham and Solihull

    AI-generated summary

    James Albert Harris · 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 Albert Harris died in hospital on 3 April 2017 after a fall at his care home, sustaining a fractured neck of femur and subsequently deteriorating with pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection and underlying health conditions. Concerns included inadequate falls-policy awareness and application, failure to seek medical attention after he reported pain, lack of analgesia, inadequate records of routine checks, and the care home being without a registered manager.

    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 follow the falls protocol requiring immobilisation and medical attention after a painful fall

    Wider context from the report

    “3. Having fallen Mr. Harris complained of pain in his groin. The home’s ‘Protocol for all Falls’ included that if the resident complains of pain in any part of the body following a fall they ought not to be moved and medical attention should be sought. Medical attention was not sought and Mr. Harris was returned to his room. The three carers who gave evidence at the inquest ████████ ████████ and ████████ all gave evidence that they had not seen the document entitled ‘Protocol for all Falls’ prior to Mr. Harris’ fall on the 26th January 2017, although ████████ and ████████ were not found to be credible witnesses, ████████ was credible. Evidence of police investigations identified that the Protocol ought to have been clearly available for staff around the home as a result of issues raised by the CQC prior to this incident. ”

    Source location

    James Albert Harris · 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

    Disseminate the falls protocol to staff and incorporate it into new-staff induction.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3) Protocol for falls – this document has been given to all staff and a signed copy is kept on their personnel file. This has also been made part of the induction protocol for new staff.”

    Source location

    2017-0334-Response-by-Care-First-Class-UK
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 December 2017

    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 falls policy in recorded staff supervision to clarify responsibilities after a resident fall.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “7) The falls policy now forms part of the Staff member’s supervision which is recorded. This is to clarify the member of staff understands their role and responsibility and what is expected when a service user has a fall. It will also be on the staff meeting agenda as a lessons learnt.”

    Source location

    2017-0334-Response-by-Care-First-Class-UK
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2017

    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

    Add the falls policy to staff-meeting agendas as a lessons-learned item.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “7) The falls policy now forms part of the Staff member’s supervision which is recorded. This is to clarify the member of staff understands their role and responsibility and what is expected when a service user has a fall. It will also be on the staff meeting agenda as a lessons learnt.”

    Source location

    2017-0334-Response-by-Care-First-Class-UK
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 December 2017

    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 Registered Provider is responsible for ensuring staff competence, training, and compliance with care plans, risk assessments, policies and procedures.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Registered Provider is responsible for ensuring care staff are competent, skilled and experienced and that they are appropriately trained as is necessary to enable them to carry out their duties, (Regulation 12 the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014).The Registered Provider has the responsibility to ensure care staff follow service users care plans, and to make staff aware of the importance of knowing how to effectively and safely support service users and the appropriate actions to take by following a service users care plan. If care staff fail to read care plans there is a risk that they will not provide the care that is appropriate to a specific service user and thus putting that service user’s safety at risk.”

    Source location

    2017-0334-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 3 · response
    Published 2 December 2017

    Open published response
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Ivy Mitchell · 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

    Ivy Mitchell, a care home resident with a history of falls, fell on 29 December 2016 and later developed a subcapital fracture and pneumonia. She deteriorated and died on 26 January 2017; concerns included inaccurate falls-risk documentation, inadequate understanding of post-fall processes and observations, failure to escalate appropriately, and lack of understanding about referral to the community nutrition team.

    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 document observations after a fall

    Wider context from the report

    “2. There was a lack of understanding amongst the care home staff of risk assessments; reviews and the required process following a fall. This included documenting observations after a fall. ”

    Source location

    Ivy Mitchell · 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 comply with escalation processes following a fall

    Wider context from the report

    “3. Processes relating to escalation following a fall were not complied with; and ”

    Source location

    Ivy Mitchell · 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

    Lack of understanding of reviews and required post-fall processes

    Wider context from the report

    “2. There was a lack of understanding amongst the care home staff of risk assessments; reviews and the required process following a fall. This included documenting observations after a fall. ”

    Source location

    Ivy Mitchell · 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

    Brief staff on documentation requirements and the falls procedure, including lessons from the identified failings.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Senior staff attended the meeting ████████ held in relation to documentation and the falls procedure. Details of which, I enclose. This information has been cascaded down to staff, and the importance of completing all the relevant documentation was discussed at length. I have emphasised the failings in relation to Mrs Mitchell, and that we must ensure it does not happen again to any of the service users. I am now auditing all care plans and daily records on a daily and weekly basis, to ensure accuracy regarding risk assessments, and that documentation in the event of a fall is completed accurately and in a timely manner.”

    Source location

    2017-0453-Response-by-Fairfield-View-Care-Centre
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 July 2017

    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

    Audit care plans and daily records daily and weekly for accurate risk assessments and fall documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Senior staff attended the meeting ████████ held in relation to documentation and the falls procedure. Details of which, I enclose. This information has been cascaded down to staff, and the importance of completing all the relevant documentation was discussed at length. I have emphasised the failings in relation to Mrs Mitchell, and that we must ensure it does not happen again to any of the service users. I am now auditing all care plans and daily records on a daily and weekly basis, to ensure accuracy regarding risk assessments, and that documentation in the event of a fall is completed accurately and in a timely manner.”

    Source location

    2017-0453-Response-by-Fairfield-View-Care-Centre
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 July 2017

    Open published response
  6. Leicester City and South Leicestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Margery Annie Astill · 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

    Margery Annie Astill was admitted to the Evington Centre under Section 2 of the Mental Health Act. On 2 September 2016, she collided with another agitated patient, fell, and was diagnosed with unsurvivable head injuries; she died three days later. Concerns included ineffective referral and incident-reporting systems, inadequate communication with family members, and delays in providing first aid after falls. The inquest also found that there was no care plan, the ward was understaffed, and not all patient observations were completed.

    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 immediate post-fall attendance, examination and basic observations

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Mrs Astill had two unwitnessed falls during her time in the unit, both were recorded on CCTV and both were due to interaction with other patients. The first fall was quickly attended by numerous nursing staff members, but there was a considerable delay in actually physically attending to the patient, examining her or taking basic observations. In a professional nursing environment this delay in first aid provision was of concern and the Trust should consider enhanced training to ensure immediate effective interventions ”

    Source location

    Margery Annie Astill · 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 CCTV footage to determine whether Basic Life Support and Immediate Life Support training requires organisational or individual changes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust resuscitation lead has the responsibility for the Resuscitation Councils (UK) Basic Life Support and Immediate Life Support training. As part of their review they will analyse the CCTV footage to understand if there are any organisational changes required to the training, or if this is purely an individual training requirement.”

    Source location

    2017-0440-Leicestershire-Partnership-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 11 July 2017

    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 clinical emergency drills with immediate reflection and feedback for participating staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to the above, I can confirm that the Trust Resuscitation Committee is overseeing the implementation of clinical drills. These drills re-enact patient emergency situations in the clinical setting in which staff on duty will participate in and will then be offered immediate practice reflection and feedback with regard to how they have responded to and managed this in practice.”

    Source location

    2017-0440-Leicestershire-Partnership-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 11 July 2017

    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

    Schedule further experiential learning and practice-development training on person-centred responses to emergency medical situations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The MHSOP Clinical Education Lead is also scheduling in further experiential learning and practice development training opportunities to reflect on the immediate person centred approach to support emergency medical situations.”

    Source location

    2017-0440-Leicestershire-Partnership-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 11 July 2017

    Open published response
  7. Black Country

    AI-generated summary

    Mrs Beryl Farmer · 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

    Mrs Farmer was admitted to hospital with severe hypocalcaemia and postural hypotension, fell from her bed and sustained facial and head injuries, and was discharged without a documented falls risk assessment. She was readmitted after developing headaches, was diagnosed with a subdural haemorrhage, later developed seizures, and died; concerns included inadequate falls-risk assessment, moving her to an unmonitored bay, limited neurological observations, and no CT head scan after the fall.

    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 post-fall neurological observations before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “3. After the fall, only one set of neurological observations were performed before her discharge. ”

    Source location

    Mrs Beryl Farmer · 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

    Reinforce the head-injury and falls-management pathway through face-to-face staff training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have the necessary policies and procedures in place to manage Head Injuries which present in our Emergency Departments. Equally the management of patients who have fallen during an admission is detailed in policies and guidance for staff. These provide both advice and instruction to staff. Having had this material re-checked by our Medical Director and Chief Nurse, it meets both NICE and NPSA standards and remains suitable. It is available to staff”

    Source location

    2016-0420-Response-by-Sandwell-and-West-Birmingham-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 February 2017

    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

    Issue an internal Patient Safety Notice on neurological observations and linking inpatient falls with head-injury management.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “through our Intranet web site. Face to face training time will reinforce this pathway in the months ahead. Additionally we will issue a Patient Safety Notice (an internal safety alert) reminding staff of the importance of neurological observations and the link being made between the management of inpatient falls with a head injury and the pathway.”

    Source location

    2016-0420-Response-by-Sandwell-and-West-Birmingham-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 February 2017

    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

    Amend the inpatient falls policy to require post-incident monitoring and link emergency-department and ward standards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are going to amend our inpatient falls policy. This will help us to ensure that post incident monitoring is undertaken. It will also more clearly link our standards in ED and on the wards. It is unacceptable that in this situation the requested monitoring was discontinued. Our use of Vital Pac and the upcoming installation of our new electronic patient record by Christmas 2017 will provide decision support and alerts to reinforce our standards. These changes will be complete by the end of March 2017.”

    Source location

    2016-0420-Response-by-Sandwell-and-West-Birmingham-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 February 2017

    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

    Install the new electronic patient record to provide decision support and alerts reinforcing inpatient-falls and head-injury standards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are going to amend our inpatient falls policy. This will help us to ensure that post incident monitoring is undertaken. It will also more clearly link our standards in ED and on the wards. It is unacceptable that in this situation the requested monitoring was discontinued. Our use of Vital Pac and the upcoming installation of our new electronic patient record by Christmas 2017 will provide decision support and alerts to reinforce our standards. These changes will be complete by the end of March 2017.”

    Source location

    2016-0420-Response-by-Sandwell-and-West-Birmingham-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 February 2017

    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 head-injury and inpatient-falls policies meet NICE and NPSA standards and remain suitable for staff use.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have the necessary policies and procedures in place to manage Head Injuries which present in our Emergency Departments. Equally the management of patients who have fallen during an admission is detailed in policies and guidance for staff. These provide both advice and instruction to staff. Having had this material re-checked by our Medical Director and Chief Nurse, it meets both NICE and NPSA standards and remains suitable. It is available to staff”

    Source location

    2016-0420-Response-by-Sandwell-and-West-Birmingham-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 February 2017

    Open published response
  8. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Margaret Emily TUCK · 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

    Margaret Emily Tuck, who had multiple myeloma, fell at home on 13 October 2015 and again in hospital on 15 October 2015. The report identified concerns about the absence of a falls prevention care plan, unclear nursing responsibility, incomplete post-fall documentation, missing neurological observations, delays in recognising possible bleeding and informing the consultant, and shortcomings in incident reporting and the hospital investigation. The inquest jury determined that her death was caused by a combination of accident and illness.

    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 complete nursing sections of post-falls checklists

    Wider context from the report

    “3. After her fall, Mrs Tuck was seen by a junior doctor who examined her thoroughly and filled in the medical portion of the post falls checklist. However, the nursing aspect of this form was never completed. The FY1 had wanted a neurological observation to be undertaken in addition to the protocol neurological observations of every 30 minutes, but her note was not wholly clear, and could have been interpreted as seeking only one neurological observation in total. In fact, no neurological observations at all were conducted on the day that Mrs Tuck fell, nor the day after. The FY1 doctor had wanted to speak to the primary nurse before leaving the bedside, but had been unable to find her. The twin nursing failures of documentation and observation might have been avoided if such a conversation had been mandatory, and there had been a simple way of achieving this. ”

    Source location

    Margaret Emily TUCK · 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 conduct required neurological observations after falls

    Wider context from the report

    “3. After her fall, Mrs Tuck was seen by a junior doctor who examined her thoroughly and filled in the medical portion of the post falls checklist. However, the nursing aspect of this form was never completed. The FY1 had wanted a neurological observation to be undertaken in addition to the protocol neurological observations of every 30 minutes, but her note was not wholly clear, and could have been interpreted as seeking only one neurological observation in total. In fact, no neurological observations at all were conducted on the day that Mrs Tuck fell, nor the day after. The FY1 doctor had wanted to speak to the primary nurse before leaving the bedside, but had been unable to find her. The twin nursing failures of documentation and observation might have been avoided if such a conversation had been mandatory, and there had been a simple way of achieving this. ”

    Source location

    Margaret Emily TUCK · 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 ensure communication between doctors and primary nurses after falls

    Wider context from the report

    “3. After her fall, Mrs Tuck was seen by a junior doctor who examined her thoroughly and filled in the medical portion of the post falls checklist. However, the nursing aspect of this form was never completed. The FY1 had wanted a neurological observation to be undertaken in addition to the protocol neurological observations of every 30 minutes, but her note was not wholly clear, and could have been interpreted as seeking only one neurological observation in total. In fact, no neurological observations at all were conducted on the day that Mrs Tuck fell, nor the day after. The FY1 doctor had wanted to speak to the primary nurse before leaving the bedside, but had been unable to find her. The twin nursing failures of documentation and observation might have been avoided if such a conversation had been mandatory, and there had been a simple way of achieving this. ”

    Source location

    Margaret Emily TUCK · 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

    Deliver multidisciplinary training on falls prevention and post-falls care, with regular assessment of planned and delivered care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3. Our Nurse Educator has been instrumental in setting up and delivering a new multi-disciplinary training programme around important issues, that includes falls prevention awareness and post falls care. As part of the Band 7 role regular assessment during the shift of care planned and delivered, is undertaken. All of our medical staff, including FY1’s, are invited to participate. Falls prevention and awareness is also included in the FY1 mandatory education programme. With the increased presence of Band 6 and 7 nurses on each shift all the clinical staff now have a first contact who they can handover important issues to, even when the named nurse is not on the ward. There are now four multidisciplinary board / handover meetings per 24-hours and these are focussed around patient safety and handover.”

    Source location

    2016-0273-Response-by-Barths-Health-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 July 2016

    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

    Hold four daily multidisciplinary safety handover meetings and use them to address communication between ward doctors, elderly-care and haematology teams.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3. Our Nurse Educator has been instrumental in setting up and delivering a new multi-disciplinary training programme around important issues, that includes falls prevention awareness and post falls care. As part of the Band 7 role regular assessment during the shift of care planned and delivered, is undertaken. All of our medical staff, including FY1’s, are invited to participate. Falls prevention and awareness is also included in the FY1 mandatory education programme. With the increased presence of Band 6 and 7 nurses on each shift all the clinical staff now have a first contact who they can handover important issues to, even when the named nurse is not on the ward. There are now four multidisciplinary board / handover meetings per 24-hours and these are focussed around patient safety and handover.”

    Source location

    2016-0273-Response-by-Barths-Health-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 July 2016

    Open published response
  9. Sunderland

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Vincent 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

    Mr Vincent Smith was admitted to a nursing and care home, experienced unwitnessed falls, was admitted to hospital, and died from a head injury and bilateral pneumonia. Concerns included insufficient assessment and action regarding his vulnerability after his first fall, alongside the need to review admissions and falls-risk assessment policies and staff training.

    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 act upon vulnerability after a fall

    Wider context from the report

    “Whilst at the Village Nursing and Care Home members of staff were to monitor and support Mr Smith’s mobilisation. Although being on notice after his first fall, there were insufficient steps taken to assess and act upon Mr Smith’s vulnerability. Evidence suggested that there ought to be: - 1) a review of the Home’s formal written admissions policy to include verification of the information provided about the suitability of a prospective resident for admission, as well as 2) a review of the Home’s formal written falls risk assessments policy and associated training for staff, together with any other steps that ought to be taken to mitigate the risks of falls. ”

    Source location

    Mr Vincent Smith · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. Manchester City

    AI-generated summary

    Milly ZEMMEL · 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

    Milly ZEMMEL, who was blind and aged 89, was admitted to hospital after becoming unwell and later suffered falls, including an unwitnessed fall on 1 March 2015 while experiencing acute confusion. She fractured her left femur, was not considered fit for surgery, and died on 3 March 2015. The principal concerns were failures in falls-risk assessment, escalation and handover after an earlier fall, appropriate supervision and observations, and the adequacy of the hospital’s internal 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 escalate required clinical review after a fall

    Wider context from the report

    “3. There was a failure to escalate the requirement for a clinical review following her fall on 21 February 2015 and nor was this identified at handovers on several occasions. ”

    Source location

    Milly ZEMMEL · 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

    Launch and disseminate the Clinical Communication and Handover Policy with structured escalation and handover documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust launched a policy for Clinical Communication and Handover in September 2015 which includes handover documentation templates with more robust information for recording safety concerns such as a patient who may be at risk of falls information and a standard framework for escalating concerns about a patient. The policy also includes the standard required for doctor to doctor handovers including for patients who have been referred and who need to be assessed. The policy has been disseminated across the clinical teams in the Trust and the senior nursing team undertake quarterly audits to assess the quality and level of compliance. This policy is within Appendix 3 - Clinical Communication and Handover Policy.”

    Source location

    2016-0139-Response-Pennine-Acute-Hospitals
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 April 2016

    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 quarterly audits of compliance with the Clinical Communication and Handover Policy.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust launched a policy for Clinical Communication and Handover in September 2015 which includes handover documentation templates with more robust information for recording safety concerns such as a patient who may be at risk of falls information and a standard framework for escalating concerns about a patient. The policy also includes the standard required for doctor to doctor handovers including for patients who have been referred and who need to be assessed. The policy has been disseminated across the clinical teams in the Trust and the senior nursing team undertake quarterly audits to assess the quality and level of compliance. This policy is within Appendix 3 - Clinical Communication and Handover Policy.”

    Source location

    2016-0139-Response-Pennine-Acute-Hospitals
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 April 2016

    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 learning about failures to obtain and escalate medical review in the Medical Division Lessons Learned Bulletin and disseminate it across wards and departments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Dissemination of Lessons Learned”

    Source location

    2016-0139-Response-Pennine-Acute-Hospitals
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 April 2016

    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 nursing staff to escalate urgent medical reviews through the specified clinical escalation route and use the SBAR communication tool.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Failure to act and escalate the lack of medical review will be included in the Lessons Learned Bulletin within the Medical Division and disseminated to all wards and departments across the division. The learning for nursing staff is to escalate to the medical team and in the first instance to the registrar and then consultant or on call Consultant, with assistance if required from within the senior nursing site team or on call/ bleep holder out of hours to ensure that any request for urgent review occurs. Staff will be required to use the communication handover SBAR tool (situation, background, assessment and recommendation) to support any communication. This is contained within the Clinical Communication and Handover Policy.”

    Source location

    2016-0139-Response-Pennine-Acute-Hospitals
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 April 2016

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026