Recurring concern

Failure to communicate clinically important information reliably between care services

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 27 Sep 2013•Latest report 10 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the cross-service clinical information communication process, including stale or unsupported guidance for emergency clinicians, omitted care decisions, inaccurate handovers and information not reaching involved services.

Not included

  • Excludes failures confined to a single clinician's knowledge or competence where no cross-service information communication issue is identified.
  • Excludes generic training, staffing, documentation or information-system deficiencies that are not specifically tied to communicating clinically important information between care services.
  • Excludes delays or failures in treatment, referral or emergency access where the material communication failure is not part of the concern.
Reports
144

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
157

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
271

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.

Department of Health and Social Care25
NHS England24
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust5
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust5
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board5
Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust5
Care Quality Commission4
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust4
Aneurin Bevan University LHB3
Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust3
Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust3
Health Services Safety Investigations Body3
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust3
Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust3
North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust3

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. City of London

    AI-generated summary

    Tony Montana Duncan · 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

    Tony Montana Duncan had a long-term mental health condition and, during an acute deterioration, told healthcare services that he had suicidal thoughts and planned to jump from a bridge. He was assessed by a psychiatric liaison team and discharged without medication review, admission, documented risk assessment, or follow-up safeguarding, despite information about his suicide plan. On 4 July 2024, he jumped into the River Thames and likely died shortly afterwards; the report identified concerns about the response of mental health services to the risks he presented.

    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 alert relevant services, the GP, or family about a high-risk patient’s departure

    Wider context from the report

    “3. The Deceased was subsequently seen in the Accident and Emergency Department by a Social Worker from the homelessness team. The Deceased insisted that he was not homeless and that he had attended the hospital for help with his mental health, without which he would jump from London Bridge. The Social Worker immediately passed this information to members of the psychiatric liaison team who he found, together, in their office. Subsequently, whilst still in the department, the Deceased became agitated and abusive, which behaviour was a recognised aspect of his behaviour when he was unwell. It seems he later left the department and/or was escorted out as he was being abusive; the records show that at least one member of the psychiatric liaison team was aware of this development but took no action to prevent the Deceased from leaving or to encourage him to stay in order to re-assess him, nor to alert the Crisis and/or Home Treatment teams, the GP, or the Deceased’s family as to the situation. ”

    Source location

    Tony Montana Duncan · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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

    Embed documented carer-contact prompts in the Liaison Psychiatry departmental handover board before discharge.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ideally, the PLN would have sought Mr Duncan’s consent to contact a named person/carer, ideally his mother with whom he lived, but did not do this; the AAR has made a recommendation to address this omission by embedding ‘carer contact’ in the Liaison Psychiatry departmental handover board; this must be done and documented before patients can be discharged. The Trust is accredited under the Triangle of Care initiative led by the Carers Trust and endorsed by NHS England, which seeks to implement six key standards required to achieve better collaboration and partnership with carers, including identification of carers at first contact; the implementation of this in the ED can be difficult for reasons outlined in the AAR, and this extra flag is intended to provide further operational support for future patient cases.”

    Source location

    Response from South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 20 October 2025

    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

    Family contact may not be possible if a capacitated patient refuses permission, although the refusal should be documented.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The AAR did note that adult patients with mental capacity to make the relevant decision may well decline or refuse a request to contact their family, but in this case there is no documentation that this discussion took place. Family members are often able to provide useful collateral information which can assist in care planning, even if the patient does not permit the clinician to share information about them. However, if a patient refuses to allow contact, it may not be possible to make this contact. This should be noted in the electronic record.”

    Source location

    Response from South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 20 October 2025

    Open published response
  2. Gwent

    AI-generated summary

    Steven Paul TURZYNSKI · 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

    Steven Paul Turzynski, who had lung cancer and a history of treated oropharyngeal cancer, died from the effects of lung cancer on 29 July 2024. The report identified very limited communication between the two dietetic teams, lack of shared records, and inadequate nutritional assessment, with significant undernutrition by the time of his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of communication between hospital and community dietetic teams

    Wider context from the report

    “Steven Paul Turzynski died from the effects of cancer, which was also responsible for his nutritional status. However the almost absent communication between the two dietetic teams and the lack of adequate assessment during the last 12 months of Steven’s life contributed to his poor nutritional state. I was informed at the inquest that the need for a face to face appointment is entirely a matter for the individual dietician. However, this decision making is not governed by guidelines nor is it monitored and can lead to an over-reliance of telephone assessments. ”

    Source location

    Steven Paul TURZYNSKI · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement a joint communication protocol for shared-care patients across hospital and community dietetic services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure sustained system-wide improvements, Velindre Cancer Service has strengthened its governance arrangements relating to dietetic care, including enhanced reporting mechanisms, improved visibility of service risks, and increased oversight of multi-professional clinical standards. We have implemented a series of measures to improve co-working and communication between hospital and community dietetic services, including:”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Continue monthly joint dietetic professional meetings with Aneurin Bevan University Health Board.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Quarterly joint dietetic meetings with ABUHB to support shared learning and early escalation of any potential risks or issues”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Complete ratification and implementation of the multidisciplinary team checklist for complex nutritional care patients.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3. Safety action description (SMART): To improve multi-disciplinary communication and working processes between VCS and ABUHB by introducing a shared communication protocol/checklist and establishing when urgent joint MDT meetings are required.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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 the multidisciplinary team checklist and share learning through quality and safety governance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Proposed action: Draft MDT checklist will go through the internal ratification process and be implemented. To ensure the checklist is robust and fit for purpose, it is necessary to undertake an audit of the checklist. This will be recorded and tracked on our internal audit governance system (AMaT) and will be reported through internal governance at quality and safety board meetings.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Use the interim shared-care transfer document for transfers between Velindre Cancer Service and Aneurin Bevan University Health Board.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Development of an interim shared care transfer document until the All-Wales standard is formally approved”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Engage with Welsh dietetic leaders to strengthen cross-boundary referral and patient handover processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Active engagement with the Welsh Dietetic Leaders Advisory Group (WDLAG) to strengthen cross-boundary referral processes”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Replicate pathway, communication and transfer safety processes across all health boards commissioned to provide services to Velindre Cancer Service.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “5. To ensure replication of safety action #1,3 &4 above, across all VCS commissioned health boards in Wales.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 9 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Maintain read-only Clinical WorkStation access for all Velindre dietitians as part of routine practice.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. Safety action description (SMART): To ensure all Dietitians have access to Clinical WorkStation (CWS) to enable full notes to be accessible between VCS and ABUHB.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 10 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Formalise digital access arrangements across all health boards commissioned to provide services to Velindre Cancer Service.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3. Safety action description (SMART): To ensure replication of safety action #1 & 2 above, across all VCS commissioned health boards in Wales.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 11 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Develop a joint transfer-of-care standard operating procedure defining referral, handover, documentation, response-time and professional-contact requirements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Assurance Statement Aneurin Bevan University Health Board (ABUHB) and Velindre University NHS Trust (VUNHST) recognise the coroner’s concern that inadequate communication between each organisations’ dietetic teams contributed to suboptimal nutritional management. Both organisations are committed to strengthening the safety and consistency of information exchange for all patients whose care is transferred across organisational boundaries.”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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 interim cross-organisational read-only clinical-record access for relevant dietitians.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Shared Access to Clinical Records: Both organisations are reviewing long term digital interoperability options with potential single patient care records, dependant on Digital Health & Care Wales support. In the interim, read only access to ABUHB clinical system (CWS) has been granted to VUHNHST dieticians and WCP access will be granted to appropriate cohort of ABUHB Dietitians”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Grant appropriate ABUHB dietitians access to WCP clinical records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Shared Access to Clinical Records: Both organisations are reviewing long term digital interoperability options with potential single patient care records, dependant on Digital Health & Care Wales support. In the interim, read only access to ABUHB clinical system (CWS) has been granted to VUHNHST dieticians and WCP access will be granted to appropriate cohort of ABUHB Dietitians”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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 quarterly joint dietetic-lead meetings to review shared cases, incidents, communication issues and process improvement.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Multidisciplinary Interface Meetings: Quarterly meetings will be held between ABUHB and VUHNHST dietetic leads to discuss and review any shared oncology cases, clinical incidents, resolve communication issues, and identify opportunities for process improvement”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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 annual joint audits of adherence to the transfer-of-care standard and assessment protocol, reporting findings through governance groups.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Annual Joint Audit: ABUHB and VUNHST will jointly audit adherence to the Dietetic Transfer of Care Standard Operating Procedure and Assessment Protocol, with findings reported to each organisation’s Nutrition & Hydration Group and/or Quality & Patient Safety assurance group”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Log communication deficiencies through Datix, review them jointly and feed identified learning into professional development.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Exception and Learning Reporting: Any deficiencies or recurrent communication failures will be logged through Datix and reviewed at joint governance meetings. Themes and learning will be fed into professional development sessions.”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 4 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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

    Maintain joint monitoring meetings to review action-plan progress, share learning and resolve cross-boundary issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “At a system level, the Health Board and VUHNHST have committed to working in close partnership to maintain and monitor these improvements. Regular joint meetings between both organisations will review progress against the action plan, share emerging learning, and resolve any cross-boundary issues in real time.”

    Source location

    Response from Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
    Page 4 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    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 actions taken are considered robust enough to prevent future deaths related to dietetic support and provision.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I hope that this response provides you with the assurance required that the action we have taken is robust enough to prevent future deaths related to dietetic support and provision.”

    Source location

    Response from Velindre University NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 October 2025

    Open published response
  3. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Honoria Culshaw · 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

    Honoria Culshaw died at home on 25 October 2024 after developing fatal pneumonia following treatment for sepsis from an infected pacemaker site. Her underlying cardiac and immunological conditions contributed to her deterioration after pacemaker extraction surgery. The report identified concern that inadequate communication about the need for pacemaker extraction delayed referral between treating hospitals and specialist services.

    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 pacemaker extraction referral requirements between specialist and local cardiology services

    Wider context from the report

    “Mrs. Culshaw attended Wythenshawe Hospital on the 10th July 2024 an presented with an opening of her pacemaker scar. I heard evidence at the inquest from ████████, a Consultant Cardiologist at Wythenshawe that International clinical guidance indicates that any opening of an implantation scar should be interpreted as a sign of systemic infection of the wound and that extraction and replacement of the pacemaker should follow in order to remove the infection. This was the advice of the on-call Cardiologist at Wythenshawe on the 10th July 2024 to the Emergency Department medical team. I heard evidence that Wythenshawe is one a limited number of specialist surgical centres for the extraction of pacemakers. Mrs. Culshaw was not admitted to Wythenshawe Hospital, but discharged to the care of Royal Preston Hospital, where her pacemaker had been fitted. Royal Preston Hospital is not a specialist surgical centre for pacemaker extraction. The expectation of Wythenshawe Hospital at the time of her discharge appears to be that Royal Preston would refer her back to Wythenshawe for extraction. However, the need for extraction and therefore a referral was not communicated by Wythenshawe to either Royal Preston or to Mrs. Culshaw’s GP. It is not clear that it was adequately explained to Mrs. Culshaw’s family. Mrs. Culshaw re-presented at Wythenshawe on the 9th September, again with signs of infection and underwent an extraction procedure as an inpatient on the 16th September 2024. However, I found that her experienced persistent and prolonged infection depleting her physiological reserve and contributed to her succumbing to a fatal pneumonia on the 25th October 2024. I am concerned that this lack of information sharing along a communication pathway between the Cardiology department and specialist surgical extraction team at Wythenshawe and the Cardiology departments at local treating hospitals risks such referrals being delayed or not being made at all, as happened in the present case. ”

    Source location

    Honoria Culshaw · 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

    Develop structured Emergency Department discharge communications and built-in referral reminders, while reviewing amendments to the current Emergency Department notes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Onward communication and referral to external providers have been a key area of focus and improvement for the Trust. Following this case, further work is being done with discharge communications from Emergency Departments to provide structured discharge information and also built in reminders to staff that if a referral is required, the correct process is following at the point of discharge. This includes working with digital colleagues to review the practicalities of amending the current Emergency Department notes that are generated by the Trust.”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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 Emergency Department HIVE discharge workflows so staff can send discharge letters to relevant healthcare providers, including external cardiology departments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the rolling programme of improvements of the use of HIVE, the Trust is committed to improve the discharge process in our Emergency Departments to ensure that the workflow is seamless and our clinical teams are aware of the functionality to send copies of Emergency Department discharge letters to a full range of healthcare providers. This would include cardiology departments at providers such as the Royal Preston Hospital.”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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

    Develop HIVE tip sheets and video guides on using the Emergency Department discharge navigator’s correspondence function and share them with relevant staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust will also develop additional HIVE tip sheets and video guides to increase knowledge and awareness of the ‘correspondence’ tab in the Emergency Department’s discharge navigator within HIVE. The tip sheets and video guides will be available by 15 December 2025 and shared with all relevant staff members by this date by the Emergency Department’s Clinical Head of Division.”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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

    Build the HIVE discharge navigator so the correspondence workflow appears in the Emergency Department’s Dispo section.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The intention is that the ‘correspondence’ workflow will appear in the ‘Dispo’ section (the discharge navigator for the Emergency Department). This will require a fundamental HIVE build and therefore will not be completed until June 2026.”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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

    Reinforce with Cardiology the importance of communicating with other secondary and tertiary care providers to maximise continuity of care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have reinforced with the Cardiology Department that communication with other secondary and tertiary care providers is of paramount importance to ensure continuity of care is maximised for patients. From 15 December 2025 onwards when the tip sheets and video guides are available, Cardiology Residents’ training will include focused education regarding the processes available to copy inpatient discharge letters that are sent to general practitioners to other relevant healthcare providers. This uses the same process within the electronic patient record as medical staff use to send letters following outpatient clinic appointments. This training will be”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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 Cardiology Residents with focused training on copying inpatient discharge letters to relevant healthcare providers and referring patients to available pacemaker extraction services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have reinforced with the Cardiology Department that communication with other secondary and tertiary care providers is of paramount importance to ensure continuity of care is maximised for patients. From 15 December 2025 onwards when the tip sheets and video guides are available, Cardiology Residents’ training will include focused education regarding the processes available to copy inpatient discharge letters that are sent to general practitioners to other relevant healthcare providers. This uses the same process within the electronic patient record as medical staff use to send letters following outpatient clinic appointments. This training will be”

    Source location

    Response from Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    Open published response
  4. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Abdirahman Afrah · 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

    Abdirahman Afrah developed severe chest pain and attended A&E, but left without being seen by a doctor after a prolonged wait. He later collapsed at home and died in hospital on 4 June 2024 from bleeding caused by a pulmonary vascular malformation. The concerns included prolonged A&E waits, lack of timely medical triage, unclear communication about the urgency of returning to hospital, failure to discuss this directly with a responsible parent, and failure to send results to his GP in time.

    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 send relevant results and discharge summaries to the GP in time for appointments

    Wider context from the report

    “5. When Abdirahman stated that he would be seeing his GP later that afternoon, he asked for the relevant results to be sent to the GP. Neither the results, nor the discharge summary were sent to the GP in time for the appointment. The inquest heard that the A&E doctor did not know how to share such information with the GP. ”

    Source location

    Abdirahman Afrah · 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 junior doctors with dedicated administration time to check results and communicate them to patients and GP practices.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since August 2024 we introduced specific administration time for junior doctors in ED to check results. During this process all resident doctors have been using Accurx to contact patients and GP practices and thus the use of this form of communication has increased significantly.”

    Source location

    2025-0245- Response from Barts Health NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 6 · response
    Published 29 May 2025

    Open published response
  5. Northumberland

    AI-generated summary

    Malcolm Morris · 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

    Malcolm Morris developed lymphoedema after surgery for penile cancer and died on 5 January 2024 after collapsing with right-thigh pain. The report raises concerns about hospitals being unable to electronically refer patients living outside their usual catchment area to community nursing services, resulting in inadequate discharge information and delayed or absent support for wound and catheter 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 transfer comprehensive discharge and ongoing treatment information to community nursing services

    Wider context from the report

    “Upon discharge from hospital in Sunderland, staff were unable to refer him electronically to district nursing services in Northumberland. They had to resort to telephoning the service to make a referral and were unable by this route to pass the necessary information to the service. As a consequence, Mr Morris left hospital requiring catheter care and wound management. He did not initially receive district nursing support. His wound became infected and required readmission to hospital. His catheter bag became full and he, nor his family had any guidance on what action to take. Evidence I heard at inquest described that hospital systems were unable to communicate with healthcare systems outside of the immediate geographical area and as such efficient referrals to district nursing services were not possible. This meant detailed information on Mr Morris's discharge arrangements and ongoing treatment could not be passed and ultimately district nurses relied on inadequate brief paper-based discharge documents. In Mr Morris's case he was supported and cared for by his wife and family. They sought advice and made contact with the district nursing services themselves to affect a referral, after the absence of nursing support following his first discharge from hospital. My concern is, had Mr Morris been discharged without any support from his family, lived alone or been vulnerable in some way, he may have not been able to access nursing services. Even with family support, his wound became infected and required readmission to hospital. My concern is other persons may be at risk of death if discharging hospitals cannot efficiently, comprehensively and in a timely fashion refer patients to ongoing care in the community. The evidence I have heard is this is an issue which is not confined to individual hospital trusts and is based on the ability of technology to ‘talk to each other’ across various NHS services. Given Sunderland Royal Hospital is a regional centre for penile cancer it means patients are treated there who are not living in the usual catchment area for the trust, and as such situations such as this with patients living out of the area must occur regularly. ”

    Source location

    Malcolm Morris · 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 of hospital systems to enable electronic referrals to community nursing services outside the usual geographical area

    Wider context from the report

    “Upon discharge from hospital in Sunderland, staff were unable to refer him electronically to district nursing services in Northumberland. They had to resort to telephoning the service to make a referral and were unable by this route to pass the necessary information to the service. As a consequence, Mr Morris left hospital requiring catheter care and wound management. He did not initially receive district nursing support. His wound became infected and required readmission to hospital. His catheter bag became full and he, nor his family had any guidance on what action to take. Evidence I heard at inquest described that hospital systems were unable to communicate with healthcare systems outside of the immediate geographical area and as such efficient referrals to district nursing services were not possible. This meant detailed information on Mr Morris's discharge arrangements and ongoing treatment could not be passed and ultimately district nurses relied on inadequate brief paper-based discharge documents. In Mr Morris's case he was supported and cared for by his wife and family. They sought advice and made contact with the district nursing services themselves to affect a referral, after the absence of nursing support following his first discharge from hospital. My concern is, had Mr Morris been discharged without any support from his family, lived alone or been vulnerable in some way, he may have not been able to access nursing services. Even with family support, his wound became infected and required readmission to hospital. My concern is other persons may be at risk of death if discharging hospitals cannot efficiently, comprehensively and in a timely fashion refer patients to ongoing care in the community. The evidence I have heard is this is an issue which is not confined to individual hospital trusts and is based on the ability of technology to ‘talk to each other’ across various NHS services. Given Sunderland Royal Hospital is a regional centre for penile cancer it means patients are treated there who are not living in the usual catchment area for the trust, and as such situations such as this with patients living out of the area must occur regularly. ”

    Source location

    Malcolm Morris · 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 and lead the Frontline Digitisation Programme to support adoption and safe deployment of electronic patient record systems.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Over the past three years, NHS England has developed and led ‘The Frontline Digitisation’ (FLD) Programme, which has supported trusts in adopting electronic patient record (EPR) systems, and which nationally supports increased consistency in digital maturity and improves information sharing between and within organisations.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 May 2025

    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

    Develop and implement the national Booking and Referral Standard to digitise and standardise referrals and bookings across care settings.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To further support more consistent interoperability across the NHS, NHS England has developed the ‘Booking and Referral Standard’ (BaRS), which is a national framework designed to help digitise and standardise referrals and bookings across care settings, including urgent and emergency care (UEC), general practice, hospital, and community services.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 May 2025

    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

    Interoperability configuration and management are assigned to local provider organisations and regional centres, rather than being led nationally by NHS England.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The FLD Programme not only enables organisations to purchase EPRs but also advises on safe and effective deployment. However, whilst FLD enhances local digital capabilities, interoperability (i.e. how different digital systems communicate with one another) is typically configured and managed at a local level, rather than being led nationally by NHS England. This will be based on local arrangements between provider organisations and regional centres, will be cognisant of the wider catchment area and will depend on the range of technology suppliers. As such, interoperability will vary depending on local infrastructure and information governance arrangements.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 May 2025

    Open published response
  6. East Riding and Hull

    AI-generated summary

    John Charles 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

    John Charles Spencer became unwell on 17 May 2024 and died on 21 May 2024 after a bowel perforation caused by obstruction within a recurrent right inguinal hernia, resulting in purulent peritonitis. The principal concern was that the GP out-of-hours surgery could not access his relevant GP medical history because different computer systems prevented the exchange of information, potentially affecting the examinations undertaken when patients do not report relevant history.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of GP out-of-hours surgeries to access key GP medical history information after patient consent

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The GP medical history summary, populated by the GP that a patient is registered to, is not always accessible to a GP out of hours surgery. Evidence was given that there are various reasons for this, including the patient not providing consent for the exchange of this information. However, on some occasions, even when a patient has consented, the patient record systems utilised by the GP registered practice and the GP out of hours surgery, insofar as being different computer systems or for whatever other technological reason, prevented the exchange of information into the GP out of hours surgery. In this case, evidence was heard that the GP practice was using the EMIS system and that the urgent treatment centre (GP out of hours surgery) was using SystmOne. That fact caused the GP out of hours surgery to not be able to access Mr Spencer’s GP medical summary. This situation generates a concern that, providing the patient has consented, key medical information may not be conveyed to the GP out of hours surgery which should be accessible to allow the appropriate exchange of medical information to inform what examinations should take place in an out of hours setting. This concern is particularly significant in circumstances where the patient does not say and/or present with the points in the medical history relevant to the GPs determination about what further examinations should occur flowing from the medical history of the patient. ”

    Source location

    John Charles Spencer · 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

    Support greater integration and awareness of record sharing between in-hours and out-of-hours providers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England is aware of the challenge in sharing medical records between providers during the in-hours and out-of-hours period and the variability between areas using different technologies. We are also aware that use of the NCRS is variable across different care settings.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Work with the Shared Care Records Programme to support wider access to relevant patient information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are therefore working across the health system to support greater integration and awareness of record sharing between in-hours and OOH providers. We are also working with the ShCR Programme to support wider access to relevant patient information.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Scrutinise providers’ handling of correspondence, clinical coding, information sharing, patient pathways and significant-event learning during inspection and monitoring activity.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As CQC is aware that computer systems across healthcare providers are often unable to communicate with each other we have taken steps to mitigate this issue. For example, we ensure that we look closely at how providers deal with incoming correspondence (e.g. letters from secondary care or other health and social care providers), coding, sharing of information with other healthcare providers and patient pathways during our inspection and monitoring activity. We also look closely at how they identify, record and learn from significant events such as this one and were satisfied with the significant event analysis undertaken by City Health Care Partnership in relation to this matter.”

    Source location

    Response from Care Quality Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Migrate clinical IT from EMIS to TPP SystmOne and enable GP Connect to support consent-based access to medical summaries.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Relating to the matters of concern raised in your report, I can confirm that Holderness Health had a planned clinical IT system migration from EMIS to TPP SystmOne on 13th May 2024, with GP Connect enabled.”

    Source location

    Response from Holderness Health
    Page 1 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Highlight the concerns to the Professional Record Standards Body regarding interoperability.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As a College our action shall be to highlight this tragic case to our health informatics group so they can use it in future discussions with NHS England. It is important that the area of Health informatics is not lost with the reorganisation of NHS and that the government both prioritise and progress action in this work. We shall also highlight your concerns to The Professional Record Standards Body (PRSB) who are dedicated to the development and implementation of health and care information standards and for whom this area on interoperability is relevant.”

    Source location

    Response from RCGP
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Dictating providers’ computer systems and IT infrastructure is outside CQC’s role and remit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within the CQC’s role or remit to dictate the computer systems that providers operate or the IT infrastructure in use as this is a commissioning matter and not something we have any direct control over.”

    Source location

    Response from Care Quality Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Decisions about providers’ computer systems and IT infrastructure are a commissioning matter, not under CQC’s direct control.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within the CQC’s role or remit to dictate the computer systems that providers operate or the IT infrastructure in use as this is a commissioning matter and not something we have any direct control over.”

    Source location

    Response from Care Quality Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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 remote surgery was not a significant or currently active problem and therefore would not generally appear in GP Connect’s limited summary.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Relating to the matters of concern raised in your report, I can confirm that Holderness Health had a planned clinical IT system migration from EMIS to TPP SystmOne on 13th May 2024, with GP Connect enabled.”

    Source location

    Response from Holderness Health
    Page 1 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    Making all GP IT systems identical is not possible because government policy promotes plurality among GP IT providers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The innovation in General Practice IT systems has been led partly by a government strategy to create a Plurality of GP IT Providers by increasing the diversity in the marketplace through NHS frameworks like the GP IT Futures Framework and more recently the Tech Innovation Framework. The new Tech Innovation framework has even brought in a new provider into the marketplace in the last few weeks called Medicus Health. It is therefore not possible for all GP IT systems across both the in and out of hours period to be the same. Recognising that there would be patient benefit to other areas of the health system such as the Hospital Emergency Departments for access to the GP Summary work has been carried out to provide interoperability.”

    Source location

    Response from RCGP
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    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

    NHS England owns the interoperability strategy and GP Connect, so responsibility for this work lies with NHS England.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This work currently falls under NHS England who own the dedicated Interoperability strategy as well as GP Connect which is a new national service which enables healthcare staff to view GP patient records significantly improving data sharing between General Practice and other parts of the NHS. It is recognised that as technology progresses the sharing of records improves but within a robust information governance structure and data sharing agreements.”

    Source location

    Response from RCGP
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 May 2025

    Open published response
  7. Gateshead and South Tyneside

    AI-generated summary

    John James JOHNSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    John James Johnson died on 22 November 2023 after pneumonia developed in the context of squamous cell carcinoma of the right lung. The cancer had been identified on a chest X-ray, but the finding was not followed up, and later treatment options to cure the cancer were unavailable. The substantive concerns included the use of multiple hospital IT systems and the risk that significant findings and information could be overlooked or returned to a department no longer involved in the patient’s 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 of multiple clinical systems to support safe transfers of care

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) During the course of my investigation I heard evidence of the Hospital Trust operating a variety of IT systems to document a patient's stay in hospital. There was not one system which contained all the information generated during a patient’s stay in hospital including, but not limited to, test results. It required clinical users to switch between systems to gather all the necessary information and raised the potential risk of significant findings being overlooked. It also slows down clinical decision making and makes it more difficult to follow a patient's overall care. (2) In Mr Johnson's case, the X Ray report was returned to a department not then involved in his care. The use of multiple systems can create a risk around safe transfers of care for discharge or handover. (3) I was told this issue is not confined to one individual Trust and the use of multiple systems is widespread across the National Health Service. Their use is well known to the national NHS responsible bodies. (4) The Trust in question, has undertaken significant work to make the multiple systems it uses as safe and effective as possible so far as they are able to within their effective control. (5) Given my concerns are not confined to the operations of one NHS Trust, this appears to be a risk that may be present nationally. ”

    Source location

    John James JOHNSON · 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

    Establish the Single Patient Record to unify patient data and provide clinicians with accessible patient information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I agree that ensuring health and care professionals have access to a single source of digital information about the patients they are treating and caring for is vitally important to delivering the best care possible. The Department of Health and Social Care, and NHS England have programmes of work underway which should assist in preventing future deaths connected to this issue.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 5 · response
    Published 19 May 2025

    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

    Each provider organisation is responsible for sharing information across different digital systems through its established local digital governance processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Where multiple digital systems, including EPR systems and RIS system are in use across a provider organisation, policies and procedures should be in place to outline expectations, advice, clinical record management, and handover of abnormal results to relevant individuals. Responsibility and accountability for the sharing of information held within electronic records, including across different systems, rests with each organisation through its established digital governance processes.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 May 2025

    Open published response
  8. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Ivy May DIXON · 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 Dixon choked on food while being fed by staff at Acorn Lodge Care Home on 6 October 2024, causing cardiac arrest. Staff did not perform CPR, and concerns were raised about inaccurate communication to paramedics, staff integrity, and possible training or clinical skills gaps in emergency 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 provide consistent and accurate communication about patient care

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The healthcare assistant who had been with Mrs Dixon on the evening of 6 October 2024, clearly referred in her statement to the patient having been fed. Shortly thereafter the healthcare assistant heard “a noise” coming from the patient’s chest and so she called for the assistance of a nearby nurse. Two nurses attended and made the reasonable assumption that the patient was choking. Treatment was administered and a set of vital observations showed that the patient’s oxygen saturations were 87%. On this basis, nursing staff called for an emergency ambulance: the London Ambulance Service (LAS) call handler was told that the patient was “choking” albeit she was breathing and conscious at that time. Despite this, once LAS staff arrived at Acorn Lodge Care Home, the Care Home staff told paramedics that they had been attempting to feed the patient, but the patient started to gasp before any food was given to her, meaning they were unable to feed her. This raises concerns about the communication and integrity of the staff members at the Care Home in their provision of care to the patient. I did not receive any reassurance that this concern has been addressed. ”

    Source location

    Ivy May DIXON · 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

    Use the incident as a learning opportunity to improve staff communication, ensuring information given to visiting professionals is accurate and understood.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will use this unfortunate incident to raise learning and development opportunities for our staff however feel strongly that our staff are already confident and competent to deal with professionals from all backgrounds including paramedics in an emergency situation.”

    Source location

    Response from Lukka Care Homes Limited
    Page 3 · response
    Published 17 April 2025

    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

    Care home staff were already confident and competent to communicate with professionals during emergencies, limiting the need for further competency measures.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will use this unfortunate incident to raise learning and development opportunities for our staff however feel strongly that our staff are already confident and competent to deal with professionals from all backgrounds including paramedics in an emergency situation.”

    Source location

    Response from Lukka Care Homes Limited
    Page 3 · response
    Published 17 April 2025

    Open published response
  9. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    DAVID WAYNE BENNETT · 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 Wayne Bennett died by hanging on 13 June 2023 after being found suspended by a ligature, with cocaine and alcohol ingestion. He had a history of drug-induced psychosis and had sought help for deteriorating mental health, psychosis and lack of sleep before his death. Concerns included inadequate sharing and recording of mental-health and primary-care information, unclear urgent-care pathways, failures to escalate requests for urgent medication review, and insufficient mental-health assessment and liaison at hospital.

    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 share vital mental health information

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Evidence was heard that the mental health crisis staff do not appear to have appropriate access to the primary care mental health System One records and there is a risk that vital information is not being shared. ”

    Source location

    DAVID WAYNE BENNETT · 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 and expand the Shared Care Record to provide unified access to patient information across partner services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Access to medical records- Shared Care Record We have several projects under development to improve the sharing of patient information between us, primary care, social care, and NHS colleagues.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid & South Essex NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 February 2025

    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

    Disseminate Shared Care Record notifications, guidance and videos to emergency department clinical staff during rollout.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Notification, training guidance and videos about the Shared Care Record are currently being disseminated to our ED clinical staff as part of the rollout programme. Once the Shared Care Record is embedded, our clinical colleagues will have access to patient records from other agencies themselves, via ACP, enabling them to have a fuller picture of the patient’s clinical background. Staff will have the potential to be alerted to previous mental health interactions or concerns outside of the acute setting, without relying on the patient’s own disclosure. The types of records currently available are set out in the graphic below.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid & South Essex NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 February 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement the NOVA unified electronic patient record across acute, community and mental health services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Unified Electronic Patient Record- NOVA The Nova programme is our long-term plan working to implement a unified electronic patient record (EPR) utilising the Oracle Health platform. This will be a joint platform across acute, community and mental health, enabling a more streamlined, transparent approach to patient care. It will link in with our shared care record (Orion) to allow GPs visibility of information and vice versa, as well as some information being sent to the patient portal, for example discharge letters, results, and questionnaires.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid & South Essex NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 18 February 2025

    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

    Develop a unified electronic patient record across EPUT and MSEFT, including bidirectional primary-care integration.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Response: We respectfully advise that MSEFT are best placed to respond to this concern, regarding access to GP records. With regards to access to the mental health records, the Trust in partnership with MSEFT are currently developing a new unified Electronic Patient record system across EPUT and MSEFT. The strategic ambition to unify care pathways remains at the centre of the programmes commitment including the bidirectional integration with primary care. The new UEPR (NOVA) is expected to go live across the Trust in February 2027.”

    Source location

    Response from Essex Partnership University NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 18 February 2025

    Open published response
  10. Devon, Plymouth and Torbay

    AI-generated summary

    William Antony Northcott · 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

    William Antony Northcott, who had treatment-resistant schizophrenia, was found deceased on 13 July 2021 after suffering a sudden fatal cardiac arrhythmia. The report raised concerns about the adequacy and consistency of information on clozapine side effects and cardiac warning signs, the detection of cardiomyopathies in patients taking clozapine, and communication between agencies and care teams.

    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 achieve clear communication of key information with other agencies involved in patient care

    Wider context from the report

    “It is clear that patients suffering with treatment resistant schizophrenia are complex, and as such there are often a number of different agencies involved in an individual's care. In addition, there are often multiple members of the same team involved in an individual's care. During the inquest it became clear that, at times, communication of important issues was not as clear as it should have been. I note that Devon Partnership NHS Trust has significant training available for its staff and other agencies it engages with in relation to patients who are prescribed Clozapine. However, it would be of great assistance to understand what Devon Partnership NHS Trust is doing to ensure that optimum communication of key information is achieved within the community mental health team, and when dealing with its other agencies involved in a patient's care. ”

    Source location

    William Antony Northcott · 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

    Adopt SystmOne electronic patient records to enable consent-based information sharing between primary and secondary mental health services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “There are a number of steps that Devon Partnership NHS Trust has adopted to ensure effective information sharing between those involved in the care of the patients.”

    Source location

    Response from Devon Partnership NHS Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 7 February 2025

    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

    Review and implement a process for sharing annual clozapine health-check outcomes with mental health services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The practice would be happy to communicate the findings and results of the annual health checks with the Mental Health Services, providing that the patient has consented to this. We had considered involvement of the ICB and LMC to facilitate a streamlined approach. However, we have established that there is a Local Enhanced Service in place which we are currently reviewing and implementing a process to be able to share the outcomes and results from the annual review with Mental Health Services.”

    Source location

    Response from The Pembroke Medical Practice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 7 February 2025

    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

    Clinical discussions with prescribers and care delivered by the Trust fall outside the regulator’s remit, so it cannot directly address them.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have considered the evidence provided and the circumstances leading to Mr Northcott’s death and acknowledge that most of your concerns relate to clinical discussions between a patient and their prescriber or via the clinical care delivered by the Trust. Unfortunately, the MHRA cannot directly address these points, as it is not within our remit to comment on the clinical care in specific cases.”

    Source location

    Response from Medicines and Healthcare Projects Regulation Authority
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 February 2025

    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

    Devon Partnership NHS Trust is responsible for improving internal and cross-agency communication, so no direct response is provided.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Concern 3: Patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia typically receive support from multiple teams and agencies. During the inquest, it became apparent that communication between professionals was, at times, suboptimal. The Coroner seeks assurance that Devon Partnership NHS Trust is working to improve internal and cross-agency communication.”

    Source location

    Response from Devon ICB
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 February 2025

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026