Recurring concern

Failure to provide timely and adequate pain relief

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 12 Sep 2014•Latest report 8 Jan 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the pain-management process involving assessment of pain, provision or selection of analgesia, response to reported pain, reassessment, escalation, specialist input and continuity of pain relief before transfer or discharge.

Not included

  • Excludes medication-prescribing, dispensing or administration failures when pain management is not the material safety concern.
  • Excludes generic delays, documentation or staffing deficiencies unless they directly impair assessment or provision of pain relief.
  • Excludes failures concerning non-pain symptoms or hazards without a material pain-management component.
  • Excludes specialist pain-service access as a standalone concern where the report does not identify an unsafe failure to manage the patient’s pain.
Reports
19

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
23

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
28

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.

NHS England3
Care Quality Commission2
Department of Health and Social Care2
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust2
Barts Health NHS Trust1
Beech Dene Residential Care Home1
Betsi Cadwaladr University LHB1
Care First Class (UK) Limited1
Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Local Health Board1
Delamere Medical Practice1
East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust1
East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust1
Home Office1
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust1
Leeds Teaching Hospitals 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. Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Richard HINTON · 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 Richard HINTON attended A&E with right calf pain and swelling after being advised to attend because of a possible clot. He was discharged before a markedly raised D-Dimer result became available; the inquest recorded pulmonary embolus due to deep vein thrombosis and bleeding duodenal ulcer, with a conclusion of “Preventable Natural Cause”. Concerns included failures in recording and communicating the D-Dimer request and result, delayed testing, inadequate documentation, and other system and process failures.

    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 check administration of Oramorph and account for symptom masking

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Other matters arising. a) A second set of observations should have been made before Mark was discharged. This did not happen. b) The D-Dimer test result was delayed due to a systems error with the CS2500 machine. It is stated that this may have happened intermittently and is then corrected. Had the system error not occurred it is likely that the (8th) result would have been available on screen for the discharging doctor to review. c) Telephone results are not made if the patient is an in-patient in A&E. The Standing Operation Procedure (SOP) in Pathology states “D-Dimer greater than 500ug/l telephone to GP, out-patients and outlying hospitals (excludes SATH in-patients)”. Is a patient waiting assessment in A&E an out-patient or in-patient or some other category? d) Differential diagnosis. Had all the information to the discharging doctor a differential diagnosis of DVT may have been made and recorded. e) A body map had not been completed at any time. f) Oramorph was recorded as having been given but not checked. Also it may the mask symptoms of pain. g) Whilst D-Dimer tests were becoming routine rather than clinically required, Mark had come in with a possible ‘clot’ whether his earlier symptoms had improved or not. h) The absence of documentation made it difficult if not impossible to resolve factual discrepancies between members of staff. i) The impression given by witnesses was that they were under pressure (racing against the clock) to meet the 4 hour deadline in A&E. ”

    Source location

    Mark Richard HINTON · 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

    There is no pharmaceutical requirement for Oramorph to be double-checked.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “f. Oramorph was recorded as having been given but not checked. Also it may mask symptoms of pain.”

    Source location

    2019-0142-Response-by-The-Shrewsbury-and-Telford-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    Open published response
  2. Norfolk

    AI-generated summary

    ROBERT CHARLES CHANDLER · 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

    Robert Charles Chandler collapsed and suffered a pneumothorax on 24 September 2018. An ambulance arrived 50 minutes after the first telephone call, and he died in hospital on 25 September 2018 from his injury. Concerns included equipment failure and transfer without pain relief or safety straps, incomplete records, inconsistent equipment checks and assistance-seeking, and delayed implementation of investigation recommendations.

    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 pain relief before ambulance transfer

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The Mangar Elk inflatable chair was intended to be used to lift Mr Chandler to the ambulance. One section did not inflate and so Mr Chandler was lifted underneath his arms and transferred to a chair borrowed from a local supermarket, no pain relief was given to Mr Chandler before being placed into the ambulance. He was later diagnosed with a pneumothorax. No safety straps were used. ”

    Source location

    ROBERT CHARLES CHANDLER · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Entonox is not indicated for potential chest injuries; administering pain relief would require IV cannulation instead.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In terms of your comments regarding pain relief and safety straps, Entonox is not indicated with potential chest injuries so IV cannulation would be needed to administer the drug. The crew felt to do this they would need to take many layers of clothes off the patient in a cold outside area and it was more appropriate to complete when in the ambulance. The Mangar Elk piece of equipment does not have safety straps attached to it as the safety element is managed by the attending ambulance staff.”

    Source location

    2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 May 2019

    Open published response
  3. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Kenneth George Alfred WHITTINGTON · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Kenneth George Alfred Whittington died following an operation, but the supplied text does not provide further circumstances of his death beyond referring to the Record of Inquest. The principal concerns included inadequate instructions and handover about management of his urinary catheter after bladder repair, failure to check a disconnected epidural despite increasing pain, incomplete blood transfusion and discharge documentation, and a delay to the initial operation because no Junior Doctor was present.

    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 check disconnected epidurals in response to increasing pain

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Immediately post operatively Mr. Whittington’s epidural became disconnected. He complained of increasing pain over the ensuing night and in spite of this nobody, not even the most senior Nurses, ever checked his epidural! It was not until some hours later in the early morning that the cause for his increasing pain was ascertained. At that stage his pain control was optimised however, this is not a situation which should have occurred. During his period of increased pain he developed a pneumonia. ”

    Source location

    Kenneth George Alfred WHITTINGTON · 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

    Revise the Trust Epidural Policy with clear guidance on disconnected and failed epidurals, including epidural failure.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Wendy Caddye, Nurse Consultant for Pain Management, has reviewed and revised the Trust’s Epidural Policy to provide robust and clear guidance for all staff on the management of disconnected and failed epidurals. A section has been added to the policy titled epidural failure. To supplement this, all Level 9A nurses have attended, or are in the process of booking to attend, an Acute Pain Study Day which includes specific training on epidural management. All nurses in charge of a shift on the ward are fully epidural trained.”

    Source location

    2019-0049-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 24 May 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 Acute Pain Study Day epidural-management training to Level 9A nurses and ensure shift-leading nurses are epidural trained.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Wendy Caddye, Nurse Consultant for Pain Management, has reviewed and revised the Trust’s Epidural Policy to provide robust and clear guidance for all staff on the management of disconnected and failed epidurals. A section has been added to the policy titled epidural failure. To supplement this, all Level 9A nurses have attended, or are in the process of booking to attend, an Acute Pain Study Day which includes specific training on epidural management. All nurses in charge of a shift on the ward are fully epidural trained.”

    Source location

    2019-0049-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 24 May 2019

    Open published response
  4. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Jacqueline Marie Elliott · 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

    Jacqueline Marie Elliott, who had a long-standing history of back pain, was found deceased at home on 9 August 2018. Post-mortem and toxicology findings identified reduced liver function and significant toxicity from a combination of drugs. Concerns included inaccurate prescription records, insufficient clinical notes and medication-review detail, prescribing of 100 tramadol tablets despite a recorded history of non-compliance and self-medication, and a lack of continuity of care.

    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 explore alternatives to repeated painkiller prescribing for persistent back pain

    Wider context from the report

    “5. There was a lack of continuity of care. Mrs Elliott saw a variety of different locum GPs. This meant that no clinician had an overview of her and her health. As a result, painkillers were repeatedly prescribed and other potential ways of managing her persistent back pain were not explored. This led to a significant reliance by Mrs Elliott on painkillers to manage her on going back problems. The inquest was told that the lack of continuity of care was due to a national shortage of GPs and was a national not local issue. ”

    Source location

    Jacqueline Marie Elliott · 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

    Provide and document advice on non-pharmacological treatments when prescribing analgesia.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Actions agreed with the CCG and in progress”

    Source location

    2019-0016-Response-by-Trafford-CCG-and-Department-of-Health-and-Social-Care
    Page 4 · response
    Published 23 May 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

    Share learning on medication follow-up, dosage advice and non-pharmacological pain treatment with GPs through training and newsletters.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. When medication is started document the plan for follow-up/review and any advice given relating to the dose to take.”

    Source location

    2019-0016-Response-by-Trafford-CCG-and-Department-of-Health-and-Social-Care
    Page 4 · response
    Published 23 May 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

    Consider running education sessions on non-pharmacological pain management and referral criteria for musculoskeletal services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Increase awareness of and consider running GP, nurse and pharmacist education sessions regarding non-pharmacological management of pain and criteria for referral to MSK service.”

    Source location

    2019-0016-Response-by-Trafford-CCG-and-Department-of-Health-and-Social-Care
    Page 7 · response
    Published 23 May 2019

    Open published response
  5. South Wales Central

    AI-generated summary

    Janice Mary Davies · 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

    Janice Mary Davies fell out of bed at home on 19 April 2018, sustaining fractured ribs, and was treated with oramorph before being discharged. She died at home in the early hours of 21 April 2018; the medical cause included morphine toxicity, bilateral rib fractures, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic kidney disease. Concerns included missing post-dose observations and pain-score documentation, and a lack of formal guidance for prescribing oramorph to patients being discharged.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of updated and documented pain scores before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) There was an absence of an updated & documented pain score prior to discharge. Most significantly, this, on the evidence of ████████ would have been desirable/required to inform the prescribing clinician, ████████ of the most appropriate prescription of oramorph to be given to the deceased upon discharge. ”

    Source location

    Janice Mary Davies · 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

    Develop a corrective Action Plan for Improvement addressing the concerns identified in the Regulation 28 report.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. Action taken to plan and monitor improvements A corrective Action Plan for Improvement has been developed which reflects the concerns identified within the Regulation 28 Report.”

    Source location

    2018-0409-Response-by-University-Health-Board
    Page 1 · response
    Published 31 December 2018

    Open published response
  6. 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 offer analgesia to residents reporting pain after a fall

    Wider context from the report

    “4. Mr. Harris was not offered any analgesia despite his reports of pain. ”

    Source location

    James Albert Harris · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Care staff cannot administer non-prescribed pain relief because the home is not a nursing home and staff lack necessary clinical skills.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Registered Provider had a system to ensure that service users received their prescribed medication, including medicines prescribed on an as required basis. However, individual care staff had not followed the provider’s protocol when Mr Harris complained of pain. The policy of the Cherry Lodge was not to offer or keep homely remedies on the premises. This means, if a service user required pain relief not already prescribed by a GP, a care worker cannot administer the medicine. In such an event, the Registered Provider’s protocol is to call for assistance either through 111 or 999. Cherry Lodge is not a nursing home and as such care staff do not have the necessary clinical skills to make judgments about people’s health, or the risk associated with administering medication that had not been prescribed.”

    Source location

    2017-0334-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 6 · response
    Published 2 December 2017

    Open published response
  7. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Leslie Isaac LERNER · 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

    Leslie Isaac Lerner died on 3 June 2016 after treatment for a fractured shoulder, including application of an incorrect sling that caused a deep pressure sore and additional pain. The report identified concerns about inadequate senior review, analgesia, communication, handover, continuity of care, recognition of pneumonia and deterioration, and delay in initiating end-of-life care.

    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 providing pain relief after hospital arrival

    Wider context from the report

    “15th May 2016 (1) Mr Lerner was back at the RSCH, by ambulance at 1006 hrs in considerable pain and discomfort. He was seen by the Consultant in Elderly Medicine at 1645 and was given analgesia at 1700 hrs – ie almost 7 hours after he arrived at the hospital. This is completely unacceptable, this man was in pain from the fracture and he should have been given pain relief. At that stage he should also have been reviewed by the Orthopaedic Team, no such review was organised. ”

    Source location

    Leslie Isaac LERNER · 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 analgesia at discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “14th May 2016 (1) Mr Lerner was kept in the Royal Sussex County Hospital overnight and towards the middle of the day he was discharged without a Senior Review. I was told that before he was discharged he should have been seen by a Senior Doctor and it may well have been that the inappropriately applied sling would have been recognised. He was sent home with no analgesia. He should have been given analgesia. It became clear from the evidence that the pain that he suffered was very much part of his overall deterioration and an exacerbating factor with his dementia. The Hospital’s own Discharge Protocol was not followed, it should have been. ”

    Source location

    Leslie Isaac LERNER · 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 balance medication effects and pain control

    Wider context from the report

    “22nd May 2016 (1) This was the day (nine days after its application) that hospital staff realised that the sling was incorrectly tied, and of the wrong type, and had caused a long deep Grade 2 pressure sore and necrotic ulcerated area where it had been pressing into the back of Mr Lerner’s neck. Every time he was moved and repositioned this wound will have chaffed and given him extra pain. With regard to his medications: these were either given at a level at which he was completely unable to communicate and co-operate and unable to realise that his family were visiting him, or left him in such pain that he was quite unable to manage it, as a result of this, his dementia and confusion worsened. A wound care nurse referral was made on the 22nd May and he was seen on the 23rd May at 2 p.m. It was not possible now to apply any sling and it wasn’t until a few days after that, that any careful thought was given to supporting his arm and shoulder in such a way as to minimise the pain. From the notes, once the sling had been removed Mr Lerner himself appeared brighter and less confused, however this improvement was short lived. He deteriorated but end of life care was not initiated until the 31st May and he died at 0835 hrs on the morning of the 3rd June. In Court the Elderly Care Consultant accepted that there had been delay in recognising Mr Lerner as a dying patient. This case showed evidence of lack of communication, lack of care, lack of continuity of care, too much use of ‘virtual’ clinics and a general “hands off” attitude towards this patient. ”

    Source location

    Leslie Isaac LERNER · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. London (East)

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Zawdie Qounseye Bascom · 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 Zawdie Qounseye Bascom developed severe abdominal pain, was assessed and discharged from A&E with a presumed diagnosis of gastritis, and later collapsed and died on 12 May 2014. The post-mortem cause of death was peritonitis due to rupture of an inflamed vermiform appendix. Concerns included inadequate recording and systematic assessment of pain, lack of documented pain relief before discharge, and insufficient attention to persistent severe pain that was unusual for gastritis.

    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 relief of severe pain before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “1) Mr Bascom presented in severe pain to A&E. This was his primary presenting problem. Despite this, there was no recording of his pain score on triage into A&E. 2) Analgesic medication was administered at 03:45 and a pain score recorded at 05:15 of 9/10. The doctor who recorded the pain score at that time could not recall whether he had any regard to the fact that analgesia had been given, when he noted the score of 9/10. 3) Further analgesia in the form of tramadol was given at 05:30. There was no further pain score recorded following this analgesia. No pain score was recorded prior to discharge. 4) On the basis of the evidence heard I found that Mr Bascom’s pain was not relieved prior to discharge. There was no documentation at all to support pain relief and ████████ confirmed that Mr Bascom continued to require support as a result of the pain, when he left the hospital. The independent expert gave evidence that the severe pain reported by Mr Bascom would be unusual in a case of gastritis. 5) It was noted in evidence that the Trust carries out pain audits in compliance with the College of Emergency Medicine. The consultant who gave evidence was unable to comment upon the practice at Newham University Hospital. The updated action plan referred only to regular audits in relation to sickle cell, fractured hip, and pain in children. The updated action plan does not address the circumstances where patients present to A&E in severe pain. 6) No pain score was recorded by any member of the nursing team. There was no evidence of any systematic assessment of pain (for example, response to analgesia). ”

    Source location

    Mr Zawdie Qounseye Bascom · 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 record pain scores at A&E triage

    Wider context from the report

    “1) Mr Bascom presented in severe pain to A&E. This was his primary presenting problem. Despite this, there was no recording of his pain score on triage into A&E. 2) Analgesic medication was administered at 03:45 and a pain score recorded at 05:15 of 9/10. The doctor who recorded the pain score at that time could not recall whether he had any regard to the fact that analgesia had been given, when he noted the score of 9/10. 3) Further analgesia in the form of tramadol was given at 05:30. There was no further pain score recorded following this analgesia. No pain score was recorded prior to discharge. 4) On the basis of the evidence heard I found that Mr Bascom’s pain was not relieved prior to discharge. There was no documentation at all to support pain relief and ████████ confirmed that Mr Bascom continued to require support as a result of the pain, when he left the hospital. The independent expert gave evidence that the severe pain reported by Mr Bascom would be unusual in a case of gastritis. 5) It was noted in evidence that the Trust carries out pain audits in compliance with the College of Emergency Medicine. The consultant who gave evidence was unable to comment upon the practice at Newham University Hospital. The updated action plan referred only to regular audits in relation to sickle cell, fractured hip, and pain in children. The updated action plan does not address the circumstances where patients present to A&E in severe pain. 6) No pain score was recorded by any member of the nursing team. There was no evidence of any systematic assessment of pain (for example, response to analgesia). ”

    Source location

    Mr Zawdie Qounseye Bascom · 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 systematically reassess pain after analgesia and before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “1) Mr Bascom presented in severe pain to A&E. This was his primary presenting problem. Despite this, there was no recording of his pain score on triage into A&E. 2) Analgesic medication was administered at 03:45 and a pain score recorded at 05:15 of 9/10. The doctor who recorded the pain score at that time could not recall whether he had any regard to the fact that analgesia had been given, when he noted the score of 9/10. 3) Further analgesia in the form of tramadol was given at 05:30. There was no further pain score recorded following this analgesia. No pain score was recorded prior to discharge. 4) On the basis of the evidence heard I found that Mr Bascom’s pain was not relieved prior to discharge. There was no documentation at all to support pain relief and ████████ confirmed that Mr Bascom continued to require support as a result of the pain, when he left the hospital. The independent expert gave evidence that the severe pain reported by Mr Bascom would be unusual in a case of gastritis. 5) It was noted in evidence that the Trust carries out pain audits in compliance with the College of Emergency Medicine. The consultant who gave evidence was unable to comment upon the practice at Newham University Hospital. The updated action plan referred only to regular audits in relation to sickle cell, fractured hip, and pain in children. The updated action plan does not address the circumstances where patients present to A&E in severe pain. 6) No pain score was recorded by any member of the nursing team. There was no evidence of any systematic assessment of pain (for example, response to analgesia). ”

    Source location

    Mr Zawdie Qounseye Bascom · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  9. North Wales (East and Central)

    AI-generated summary

    Clive Harold Turner · 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

    Clive Harold Turner was taken to hospital after delays in the response to a call for medical assistance and was discharged after being incorrectly diagnosed as constipated. He was later found deceased at home from a gastrointestinal haemorrhage due to ischaemic bowel resulting from atherosclerosis. Concerns included uncertainty about pain relief provided by the ambulance service, lack of awareness of overnight discharge policies, and the absence of senior clinicians available for a second opinion.

    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 emergency clinicians know what pain relief has already been provided

    Wider context from the report

    “That ████████SHO in Emergency Medicine indicated in her evidence as follows :- 1. that she did not know what pain relief had been provided to Mr Turner by the Welsh Ambulance Service 2. that she was not aware of any policies within BCUHB relating to the discharge of patients overnight. 3. that there were no senior clinicians on duty from whom she could seek a second opinion due to the lateness of the hour when she was attending to Mr Turner. ”

    Source location

    Clive Harold Turner · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026