Recurring concern

Unreliable hospital emergency-response protocols

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 16 May 2016•Latest report 18 Mar 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in hospital processes for developing, maintaining, publishing, accessing, communicating, understanding or applying operational protocols for emergency situations, including the anchor's absent hospital emergency protocols and comparable failures where hospital staff cannot readily locate or use relevant emergency protocols.

Not included

  • Excludes emergency-response failures outside hospital settings unless the assertion explicitly concerns the same hospital emergency-response protocol system.
  • Excludes generic staff training, communication, staffing or equipment deficiencies unless they directly impair hospital emergency-response protocols.
  • Excludes failures in the clinical treatment or emergency response after relevant hospital protocols were available, understood and applied.
  • Excludes protocols for a separately named hospital pathway or system, such as pre-alerts, Code Blue or hospital-at-night coordination, where that named concern provides the more specific supported boundary.
Reports
2

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
3

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2016–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
9

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 Commission1
Circle Health Group Limited1
General Medical Council1
Nuffield Health1
Royal College of Radiologists1
Royal Surrey County Hospital1

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. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Julie Anne Pytches · 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

    Julie Anne Pytches died on 14 October 2023 during elective spinal surgery after suffering a covert probable arterial bleed, major haemorrhage and cardiac arrest while prone in the operating theatre. The report identifies concerns about emergency protocols, staff understanding and training, communication of clinicians’ practice limitations, and uncertainty about ambulance attendance and possible transfer to a tertiary centre.

    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 staff understanding of emergency protocols

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) The site manager was new and although there had been some training for her role, there was a lack of understanding of the emergency protocols and this was also the case with nurses at the hospital for this event. A very senior member of the ambulance crew was attempting to assist the site co-ordinator as to locate the most relevant documents. Training needs to be embedded and protocols readily available. ”

    Source location

    Julie Anne Pytches · 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

    Unavailability of relevant emergency protocols at the point of need

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) The site manager was new and although there had been some training for her role, there was a lack of understanding of the emergency protocols and this was also the case with nurses at the hospital for this event. A very senior member of the ambulance crew was attempting to assist the site co-ordinator as to locate the most relevant documents. Training needs to be embedded and protocols readily available. ”

    Source location

    Julie Anne Pytches · 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

    Maintain recurring major-haemorrhage and emergency scenario training, including escalation, blood-supply, role-clarity, documentation and transfer exercises.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Emergency reference guides are consistently available across all departments and include guidance for cardiac arrest and major haemorrhage in line with Nuffield Health Policy CL71 Medical Emergencies and Resuscitation Council guidelines. The availability, accessibility and use of these guides are routinely reviewed and reinforced through regular emergency scenario training and simulations to ensure staff familiarity and effective application in practice. Laminated emergency algorithms, including adult major haemorrhage pathways, are located on resuscitation trolleys and in key clinical areas.”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 5 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    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

    Further develop the major-haemorrhage training module to clarify end-to-end processes and differences from NHS pathways.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Further actions across Nuffield Health:”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 7 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Roll out mandatory emergency-protocol induction for site leaders, night coordinators and senior nursing staff, including role responsibilities.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Further actions across Nuffield Health:”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 7 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Monitor emergency training compliance, emergency-document availability, MyStaff policy access and scenario outcomes through audit and governance processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Ongoing monitoring will be undertaken through existing audit and assurance processes, including Interim Quality Assurance Report requirements, scenario dashboards, and governance reviews.”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 8 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    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

    Operate MyStaff as a centralised platform for accessible Group and local policies, update alerts and critical-policy readership analytics.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Nuffield has implemented MyStaff, a centralised policy management system providing real-time access to Group-level and local policies via desktop and secure mobile application. We are the first independent provider to have done this. This ensures policies are more accessible at the point of care and that users are alerted when documents are updated. Phase 1 (launched November 2025) migrated all Group policies and associated documents to the platform. Phase 2 (launched April 2026) introduced analytics to monitor readership of critical policies, strengthening assurance and enabling targeted follow-up. All staff and Consultants have 24/7 access to policies via the MyStaff app (on and off site).”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 5 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Use policy-access and readership analytics to assure Consultant and staff engagement with critical emergency documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Further actions across Nuffield Health:”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 6 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    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

    Update induction and practising-privileges renewal checklists to cover MyStaff access and locating local emergency policies.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Further actions across Nuffield Health:”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 6 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    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

    All staff, including the site manager, had received training on the transfusion and major haemorrhage policies in force at the time.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The site manager was new to the role but previously held a Senior clinical role as head of department in the Hospital for 9 years prior.”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 6 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    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 Regulation 28 concerns did not contribute to the patient’s death.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “HM Coroner specifically noted that the Regulation 28 concerns did not contribute to this patient death.”

    Source location

    Response from Nuffield Health
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 March 2026

    Open published response
  2. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Critall · 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 Critall, an 80-year-old man, developed a haemothorax after insertion of a chest drain while being treated for pneumonia and died on 6 July 2014 after further deterioration and emergency treatment. The report raised concerns about the necessity and technique of the drain insertion, the failure to confirm its position, inadequate monitoring and resuscitation, and the hospital’s lack of appropriate emergency facilities and protocols. It also recorded that his family were not contacted after he became unwell or died.

    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

    Absence of operational protocols for hospital emergency situations

    Wider context from the report

    “2. The absence of operational protocols and a HDU/ITU facility to manage emergency situations and a reliance on a 999 call for paramedics to provide care for a hospital who undertakes such procedures prior to transferring an unwell patient to an NHS hospital. ”

    Source location

    Mr Critall · 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 and update the Elective and Non-Elective Transfer Policy, agreeing emergency transfer processes with Royal Surrey County Hospital and making them available to relevant staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. The hospital’s Elective and Non-Elective Transfer Policy, has been reviewed and updated to reinforce the registered level of care provided by the hospital. The process for transfer in an emergency situation was agreed with the Medical Director at the Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Trust and incorporated into the policy. The Policy is available for RMO and senior nursing staff within the RMO induction and bleep holder file.”

    Source location

    2016-0187-Response-by-Mount-Alvernia-Hospital
    Page 3 · response
    Published 16 May 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

    Establish a local SOP requiring critically ill patients to move automatically to the theatre recovery area for comprehensive monitoring and anaesthetic support.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2. A local standard operating procedure (SOP) has been agreed at the hospital resuscitation committee to reinforce the management of a critically ill patient whereby a patient is automatically transferred to the recovery area within the hospital’s theatre complex to ensure access to comprehensive monitoring equipment and anaesthetic staff.”

    Source location

    2016-0187-Response-by-Mount-Alvernia-Hospital
    Page 3 · response
    Published 16 May 2016

    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 hospital had an emergency transfer policy and facilities to stabilise critically ill patients before transfer.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The hospital has an Elective and Non-Elective Transfer Policy in place which sets out the requirements for transfer of patients in emergency situations. The policy acknowledges that clinical deterioration can occur at any stage of a patient’s pathway. The National Early Warning Score (NEWS) is a tool to support staff to recognise deterioration at an early stage and escalate for medical assessment by the RMO. If following assessment it is deemed necessary, the patient’s consultant or other relevant professional, e.g. consultant anaesthetist should be contacted for advice or asked to attend.”

    Source location

    2016-0187-Response-by-Mount-Alvernia-Hospital
    Page 3 · response
    Published 16 May 2016

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026