Recurring concern

Incomplete clinical history-taking

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 31 Mar 2014•Latest report 31 Oct 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures to obtain a sufficiently complete and relevant patient history during clinical assessment, consultation, admission, clerking or health checks, including failure to elicit relevant information from the patient or appropriate informants.

Not included

  • Excludes failures limited to recording or documenting information that was already obtained, unless the report also identifies incomplete history-taking.
  • Excludes failures limited to communicating or handing over an already established history, unless the underlying history was not adequately obtained.
  • Excludes deficiencies in treatment, referral, escalation or testing where incomplete history-taking is not itself the recurring unsafe condition.
Reports
55

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
58

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
96

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 England11
Department of Health and Social Care6
North East London NHS Foundation Trust4
Barts Health NHS Trust3
Care Quality Commission3
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust3
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust3
General Medical Council2
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust2
Medway NHS Foundation Trust2
Ministry of Justice2
North London NHS Foundation Trust2
Royal College of Emergency Medicine2
Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health2
Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust2

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. East London

    AI-generated summary

    David Ayontunde Walker · 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

    David Ayontunde Walker died on 27 November 2020 after his mental health deteriorated following discharge from hospital. The report identified concerns about repeated changes of care co-ordinator and the failure to obtain and share important risk information between the mental health trusts, resulting in an incomplete discharge risk assessment.

    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 obtain collateral healthcare information from other trusts on hospital admission

    Wider context from the report

    “2. On admission to hospital on the 10th November 2020 no steps were taken to seek collateral information from other Trusts involved in the care of Mr Walker. Mr Walker had been under the care of East London Foundation Trust in July and August 2020 and this Trust held a great deal of vital risk information that should have been available to the North East London Foundation Trust team. There was no evidence that the admission check list included the requirement for collateral healthcare information to be sought. ”

    Source location

    David Ayontunde Walker · 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

    Communicate to inpatient staff how to access external shared-link records for collateral information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “No evidence collateral healthcare information sought Our inpatient services have sent communication to all inpatient staff, which clearly outlines how staff can access ELFT records through an external shared link on the patient electronic record. As part of the Admission process, the electronic Admission checklist / audit section on RIO, will be amended to include a section which asks whether a patient is known to another Trust and prompts staff to obtain collateral information, as part of the standard admission process. A further reminder will be sent to all medical and nursing staff to ensure that this is obtained at the earliest opportunity.”

    Source location

    Response from North East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 22 October 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Amend the electronic admission checklist to prompt staff to identify other Trust involvement and obtain collateral information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “No evidence collateral healthcare information sought Our inpatient services have sent communication to all inpatient staff, which clearly outlines how staff can access ELFT records through an external shared link on the patient electronic record. As part of the Admission process, the electronic Admission checklist / audit section on RIO, will be amended to include a section which asks whether a patient is known to another Trust and prompts staff to obtain collateral information, as part of the standard admission process. A further reminder will be sent to all medical and nursing staff to ensure that this is obtained at the earliest opportunity.”

    Source location

    Response from North East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 22 October 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Send a further reminder to medical and nursing staff to obtain collateral information at the earliest opportunity.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “No evidence collateral healthcare information sought Our inpatient services have sent communication to all inpatient staff, which clearly outlines how staff can access ELFT records through an external shared link on the patient electronic record. As part of the Admission process, the electronic Admission checklist / audit section on RIO, will be amended to include a section which asks whether a patient is known to another Trust and prompts staff to obtain collateral information, as part of the standard admission process. A further reminder will be sent to all medical and nursing staff to ensure that this is obtained at the earliest opportunity.”

    Source location

    Response from North East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 22 October 2021

    Open published response
  2. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Fadhia SEGULEH · 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

    Fadhia Seguleh was receiving treatment for anxiety and depression when she was found unresponsive, attached to a ligature at her home on 24 February 2021. The concerns included fragmented care and inadequate information sharing between NHS mental health services, her GP and private therapy provider, telephone-only mental health assessments during Covid, and her attending A&E alone during a previous mental health crisis without family input.

    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 enable relevant family input during emergency mental health assessment

    Wider context from the report

    “3. The inquest heard evidence that she had on a previous occasion been taken to A and E due to concerns that she would take her own life/self-harm. Due to Covid she had to go alone to A and E and was assessed alone without input from her family who were aware of the full picture. The experience of attending alone whilst experiencing mental health issues was deeply stressful for her and meant that she had been unsupported by her family at a time of crisis. In addition, the quality of information available was limited as a result of her being there alone. ”

    Source location

    Fadhia SEGULEH · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  3. Mid Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    BETTY ANNIE TADMAN · 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

    Betty Annie Tadman died after an unwitnessed fall at home caused a pelvic fracture with extensive local haemorrhage. She was treated for suspected urosepsis and deep vein thrombosis, but no imaging was conducted despite signs of possible injury, and the pelvic fracture and internal bleeding were not diagnosed. Concerns were also raised that the Trust did not investigate the death or review it through its morbidity and mortality processes.

    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 consider the circumstances of a fall during clinical assessment

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Mrs Tadman had dementia and a long-term catheter who was admitted to hospital with a pre-alert for suspicion for urosepsis that was treated appropriately. However, urine dipstick tests were only positive for blood and consideration was not given to the circumstances in which she was found with a history of a fall. ”

    Source location

    BETTY ANNIE TADMAN · 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 staff teaching and simulated training on evidence-based trauma care for elderly patients.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.2. Prior to the Covid pandemic, extensive staff teaching and training had already been undertaken on improving trauma care of the elderly with a focus on the emerging evidence-based pathway of “silver trauma” care. This training programme, which included simulated exercises, is currently suspended but will be resumed shortly.”

    Source location

    2021-0023-Response-from-Medway-Maritime-Hospital-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 February 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Resume the suspended staff teaching and simulated training programme on elderly trauma care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.2. Prior to the Covid pandemic, extensive staff teaching and training had already been undertaken on improving trauma care of the elderly with a focus on the emerging evidence-based pathway of “silver trauma” care. This training programme, which included simulated exercises, is currently suspended but will be resumed shortly.”

    Source location

    2021-0023-Response-from-Medway-Maritime-Hospital-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 February 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement ED silver trauma screening for frail patients with low-energy trauma, including senior-clinician assessment where red flags require escalation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.3. The Trust is committed to implementing the “silver trauma” screening system in ED for frail patients presenting with ‘low energy’ trauma with an assessment led by a senior clinician (ST 4 +) if there are any red flags signs for escalation.”

    Source location

    2021-0023-Response-from-Medway-Maritime-Hospital-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 February 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Adopt the London Major Trauma System elderly-trauma screening and triage pathway prompting immediate senior-doctor assessment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.5. The Trust plans to adopt the London Major Trauma System; Management of Elderly Major Trauma Patients – Second Edition whereby trauma units use an effective screening triage tool on elderly patients who self-present or arrive by ambulance and this prompts an immediate senior doctor (ST4+ level ) review for assessment. Since November 2018, we have already introduced a “front door” team of specialist nurses to assess elderly frail patients upon arrival in ED to expedite their transfer to the ward or escalate for medical advice or discharge as appropriate.”

    Source location

    2021-0023-Response-from-Medway-Maritime-Hospital-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 February 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide a specialist-nurse front-door team to assess frail elderly patients arriving in ED and expedite transfer, escalation or discharge.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.5. The Trust plans to adopt the London Major Trauma System; Management of Elderly Major Trauma Patients – Second Edition whereby trauma units use an effective screening triage tool on elderly patients who self-present or arrive by ambulance and this prompts an immediate senior doctor (ST4+ level ) review for assessment. Since November 2018, we have already introduced a “front door” team of specialist nurses to assess elderly frail patients upon arrival in ED to expedite their transfer to the ward or escalate for medical advice or discharge as appropriate.”

    Source location

    2021-0023-Response-from-Medway-Maritime-Hospital-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 February 2021

    Open published response
  4. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas Rawnsley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

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

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to use a standard set of initial questions during clinical triage

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) There is a standard set of questions asked by the call handler on a 111 or 999 call which is not then replicated for clinicians who subsequently triage a patient. Without a standard set of initial questions asked it is entirely possible that clinicians will provide advice in isolation of other important matters. This could be as simple as current medications that the patient routinely takes or current diagnosis the patient has which impact upon the advice to be provided. This may lead to incomplete or worse, inappropriate advice being given to patients during a clinical triage. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Rawnsley · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Replicating NHS 111’s standard questions for subsequent clinicians is considered unnecessary because the existing assessment and information-sharing process is sufficient.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In light of this, we consider that replicating the standard set of questions asked by 111 call handlers to clinicians subsequently involved, would not improve the process which is in place, as described above.”

    Source location

    2020-0283-Response-from-NHS-National-Medical-Director-Redacted
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 January 2021

    Open published response
  5. Lincolnshire

    AI-generated summary

    Carlington Maurice Spencer · 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

    Carlington Maurice Spencer, a detainee at Morton Hall IRC, suffered a right middle cerebral artery infarction after being found unwell and was later confirmed deceased on 3 October 2017. The report identifies concerns about confirmation bias relating to presumed drug use, inadequate monitoring and record keeping, poor communication and escalation between discipline and healthcare staff, failures to recognise stroke symptoms, and delays in emergency treatment.

    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 establish the timing, quantity and potency of drug consumption

    Wider context from the report

    “2. The case demonstrated the failures of existing systems, management and working practices within the healthcare provision for detainees at Morton Hall IRC namely: a. The existence of "confirmation bias" or "confirmatory bias" when dealing with a detainee with a known history of recreational drug use in such a way that when a detainee presents in a manner that is interpreted as being presumed or assumed to be attributable to recent self-induced intoxication, this assumption or presumption is not clinically evaluated by reference to a verification of evidence supporting of recent drug consumption (such evidence being available either from the patient, from Discipline staff, from other detainees, physical evidence in the room); b. In cases where a diagnosis of recent self-induced intoxication has been reasonably made, a differential diagnosis is not considered to evaluate the potential exacerbations of the patients pre-existing co-morbidities; c. No appreciation exists of the importance of establishing when the detainee had last consumed drugs and in what quantity and at what potency; d. Failure to consult information contained on the Illicit Substance Misuse Programme; e. An absence of protocols or clear instructions/expectations from healthcare staff to Discipline staff that in the event a conservative pathway of treatment is considered appropriate (the detainee being allowed to "sleep off" the effects of the drugs) how long this should be permitted in a case of presumed "Spice" consumption; f. An absence of protocols or clear escalation pathways or working practices between healthcare staff and Discipline staff that recognises the primacy of the role of healthcare staff in any case involving ongoing care for a detainee, in particular in a scenario of a detainee with relevant co-morbidities who is recovering from a presumed "Spice" incident; g. Inadequacy of knowledge and training in the diagnosis, treatment and care in cases of self-induced intoxication by reason of "new psychoactive substances"; ”

    Source location

    Carlington Maurice Spencer · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 5 · concerns

    Open source report
  6. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Gary Etherington · 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

    Gary Etherington was found dead in his van after taking an overdose of his wife’s Amitriptyline; the inquest concluded that his death was suicide. The coroner identified failures in the mental health assessment and discharge process, including inadequate investigation of psychotic symptoms and suicide risk, insufficient communication with the GP, and an unreliable Root Cause Analysis that failed to identify these care problems.

    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 take and consider relevant patient history before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “The coroner found that there were two failures in medical care, namely 1. The failure to contact ████████ at the Mental Health Act assessment in April 2. The failure to take and consider the history of ████████ before discharge and to discharge to GP care, without proper consideration of the voices telling him to commit suicide, delusions of people being present, their cause and relation to drug misuse, or the risks to ████████, about which there was an inadequate plan communicated to the GP. ”

    Source location

    Gary Etherington · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Karis Florence Braithwaite · 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

    Karis Florence Braithwaite, aged 24, died after stepping in front of a fast train on 24 September 2018 following discharge from a Section 136 mental health assessment. The concerns included important risk information from the paramedic and police not being available to the assessment team, and handover information not being adequately documented or transferred into the Trust’s records.

    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 elicit relevant information from first responders during assessment

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Important risk information was provided to the Trust by a first responder (paramedic) but was not available to the MHA assessment team. 2. A copy of the PRF form was left with staff but does not appear to have been uploaded to the electronic records or a paper copy provided to the assessing team. 3. The paramedic provided a verbal handover to staff which does not appear to have been documented in the patient’s records. 4. The police officer who attended with Karis also gave evidence as to difficulties in providing a handover to the receiving mental health team. 5. A PFD report was written to the Trust on the 2nd December 2016 noting: There was also relevant information available to the paramedics and police that was not elicited by the assessing team. It became apparent during the course of the Inquest that the police also had access to information which was relevant to the circumstances of the preceding events which would have been relevant to the mental state of the deceased. It would appear that inadequate questions were asked by the receiving hospital team in relation to the circumstances leading to admission. In light of the evidence heard at Ms Braithwaite’s inquest, there is a concern that insufficient steps have been taken by the Trust to improve the handover process from first responders to Trust staff following serious incidents in the community. ”

    Source location

    Karis Florence Braithwaite · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. East Sussex

    AI-generated summary

    Justin Peter Gallagher · 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

    Justin Peter Gallagher was received at HMP Lewes on 20 March 2016 and was later found collapsed in his segregation-block cell on 24 May 2016. He was taken to hospital, where he died on 17 June 2016; the post-mortem recorded hypoxic brain injury, cardiac arrest and laryngeal carcinoma with upper airway obstruction among the causes. Concerns included the absence of his previous medical history, a proper care plan and a single clinician responsible for his care, cancelled hospital appointments, missed opportunities to diagnose his cancer, lack of family involvement, and separate healthcare organisations using unconnected database systems.

    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 obtain previous medical history

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The prison never obtained his previous medical history. No proper care plan was drafted for him and there was no single clinician responsible for his care. ”

    Source location

    Justin Peter Gallagher · 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

    Request community medical records for newly arrived prisoners within one week.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Clinical Reviewer recommended that the Head of Healthcare at HMP Lewes should ensure that the past medical history is obtained for new prisoners with chronic conditions, and that their care should be assigned to a named clinician. I can confirm an action plan was implemented with all actions achieved by 1 April 2017 which included:”

    Source location

    2019-0491-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 August 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

    Audit healthcare-record requests to verify that the records-request process is effective.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• an audit of healthcare record requests in March 2017 to ensure the process was effective and efficient. As a result of your report I can confirm commissioners have asked SPFT to undertake a further audit which was completed in November with the outcome due to be shared by the end of December 2019. A CQC focus visit took place on 21 and 22 October 2019 and it was reported to the commissioners that record keeping and care planning in particular had significantly improved with the input of additional resources to support this process.”

    Source location

    2019-0491-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 August 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

    Run regular SystmOne reports checking whether newly arrived prisoners’ healthcare records have been requested.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• the running of a regular report via SystmOne to ensure that healthcare records have been requested; and”

    Source location

    2019-0491-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 3 · response
    Published 16 August 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

    Improve prison healthcare data and intelligence collection and enable information-sharing before, during and after incarceration to support continuity of care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Agreement sets out a joined-up, strategic approach to meet the complex nature of offender health care needs and provides the partnership members with an overarching framework for collaborative working at all levels. The Agreement has three shared core objectives to be delivered through ten high level priorities. These priorities are underpinned by the Agreement’s 2018 Workplan, which includes a commitment to deliver on three key issues that relate to the responsibilities of all organisations involved in prison care. These commitments are to:”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 August 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

    Healthcare providers are responsible for the quality and safety of care provided at HMP Lewes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Providers of healthcare services are responsible for the quality and safety of the care they provide. I expect the healthcare providers at HMP Lewes to look into the care provided to Mr Gallagher and to consider where improvements can be made. This includes how they work with the prison authorities and other relevant organisations, including NHS England which is responsible for commissioning healthcare services for prisoners. Given its role in monitoring, inspecting and regulating the providers of health and social care in prisons, my officials have brought your reports to the attention of the Care Quality Commission (CQC).”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 August 2019

    Open published response
  9. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Deborah Chapman · 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

    Deborah Chapman, who had COPD, chronic pain, and continued to misuse heroin and crack cocaine, was found unresponsive at home on 3 March 2019 and was pronounced dead at 7.06am. The post-mortem attributed her death to the combined toxic effects of heroin, oxycodone and pregabalin, together with COPD. Concerns included whether her ongoing illicit drug use and the risks of combining prescribed and illicit drugs had been adequately assessed and recorded when prescribing oxycodone and pregabalin.

    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 enquire about patients’ current or continued illicit drug misuse

    Wider context from the report

    “2. The evidence I heard from the records held at the medical centre did not reveal the extent to which any enquiry was made of Ms Chapman as to her current misuse of illicit drugs either on the occasion of her re-joining the medical practice as a patient in July 2018 or at subsequent consultations. There were clear signs of a dependence on the prescribed opiate drugs and the medical records equally revealed long-term illicit opiate misuse. 3. The evidence I heard from the medical records held at the medical centre did not reveal, beyond the admitted dependence on the prescribed medication, what enquiry had been made from Ms Chapman in relation to her continued misuse of illicit drugs or her response to those enquiries. 4. In the absence of that information, it was not possible, from the medical records, to ascertain what level of risk the continued illicit misuse of opiates posed to Ms Chapman and therefore, whether, on an informed basis, pregabalin and oxycodone were appropriate prescriptions. ”

    Source location

    Deborah Chapman · 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

    Search the clinical system regularly for patients receiving regular opiate analgesia or Pregabalin who have a history of drug misuse.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have put in place a regular search of our clinical system to identify patients that are taking regular opiate analgesia and who have a past history of drug misuse. A similar search has been undertaken for those patients taking regular Pregabalin. The searches have identified 16 patients taking regular opiate analgesia with a history of drug misuse and 7 patients taking Pregabalin with a history of past drug misuse. We are currently contacting those patients to ensure that we have an up to date record of their current illicit drug use.”

    Source location

    2019-0280-Response-from-West-Timperley-Medical-Centre-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 October 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

    Contact identified patients to update records of their current illicit drug use.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have put in place a regular search of our clinical system to identify patients that are taking regular opiate analgesia and who have a past history of drug misuse. A similar search has been undertaken for those patients taking regular Pregabalin. The searches have identified 16 patients taking regular opiate analgesia with a history of drug misuse and 7 patients taking Pregabalin with a history of past drug misuse. We are currently contacting those patients to ensure that we have an up to date record of their current illicit drug use.”

    Source location

    2019-0280-Response-from-West-Timperley-Medical-Centre-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 October 2019

    Open published response
  10. Manchester City

    AI-generated summary

    Alistair Patrick McDonald · 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

    Alistair Patrick McDonald, who had disclosed suicidal thoughts and a history of deliberate self-harm, was found dead on 14 May 2018, hanging by a ligature secured to a door frame. The concerns included the assessment and management of his suicidal ideation and self-harm, lack of follow-up and clear referral plans, communication with him and his family, and failure to recognise the wider significance of his presentation.

    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 account for partial disclosure of symptomology and history

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Whether or not the specific deliberate self-harm or suicidal ideation criteria need to be reviewed and redrafted 2. The lack of a specific plan for referrals to other services which proved unsuccessful 3. The opportunity to take a broader view of the whole position and have an assessment by an experienced psychiatrist. 4. Ensuring a proper line of communication with the patient and the patient’s family to ensure appropriate reviews if the patient’s mental state deteriorates 5. Obtaining detailed feedback from services the patient is referred to, to check on attendance and progress 6. Recognising that some patients will only make partial disclosure of their true symptomology and history. 7. Loss of opportunity to see the bigger picture, which was of an academically bright student but who nonetheless was disclosing physical self-harm and suicidal intent, as well as an inability to deal with stress or pressure; and have a plan to review and deal with this 8. Ensuring if there were any failed communications with the patient or the family, to have a plan to take specific action to deal with this. ”

    Source location

    Alistair Patrick McDonald · 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

    The actions taken regarding partial disclosure were considered reasonable and proportionate, so no further action was identified.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As previously stated the staff working within the CAMHS SPA are experienced mental health practitioners from a wide range of professional backgrounds, with extensive support and supervision arrangements in place. It is not unusual for patients to not fully disclose the extent of their symptomology. Clinicians are skilled in assessing patients holistically, through a range of mechanisms.”

    Source location

    2019-0257-Worcestershire-Health-and-Care-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 September 2019

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026