Recurring concern

Medication quantity controls failing to prevent unsafe access to excessive amounts

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 14 Mar 2014•Latest report 27 Oct 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of controls dedicated to medication quantity governance, including prescribing, dispensing, online supply, transaction verification, ordering frequency, and adjustment of quantities to overdose or lethal-dose risk.

Not included

  • Excludes generic medication record-keeping failures unless they directly undermine medication quantity control.
  • Excludes medication counselling or clinical review failures when the report does not identify unsafe access to excessive quantities as the shared condition.
  • Excludes shortages, delays or insufficient access to medication.
  • Excludes unrelated failures in care, staffing, emergency response or other operational processes.
Reports
29

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
33

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
41

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 Care5
NHS England4
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency3
1st For Health International Limited1
Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs1
Axminster Medical Practice1
Bolton NHS Foundation Trust1
Cardiff & Vale University LHB1
Clinical Commissioning Group (Devon)1
c/o Mark Reynolds Solicitors1
Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust1
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport1
Devon Partnership NHS Trust1
Eltham Medical Practice1
General Medical Council1

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. Black Country

    AI-generated summary

    Danielle Monique Christina JONES · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Danielle Jones was found unresponsive at home on 13 May 2025 and was confirmed deceased by paramedics. Post-mortem toxicology found high levels of amitriptyline, excess zopiclone and recent substantial cocaine use; the recorded cause was combined multidrug toxicity. The principal concerns were that, despite reported prescription overdoses and concerns raised by a drug and alcohol service, her repeat prescription medication does not appear to have been reviewed and was continued in large quantities at 28-day frequency.

    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

    Continued prescribing of repeat medications in large amounts at 28-day frequency after overdose disclosure

    Wider context from the report

    “5. Although Miss Jones was signposted to Mental Health Services by her GP, her prescription medications do not appear to have been reviewed and the GP surgery continued to prescribed repeat medications in large amounts at 28 day frequency without any further review subsequent to her appointment on 25/2/25. 6. She was issued with repeat prescriptions on 3 occasions subsequent to her appointment on 24th and 25th February 2025 when she self-closed an overdose of prescription medication. 7. On 6/3/25 despite a recent self-reported admitted overdose of prescription medication of ████████ ████████ ████████ Miss Jones was prescribed 8. On 27/3/25 despite a recent self-reported admitted overdose of prescription medication of ████████ ████████ Miss Jones was prescribed Amitriptyline ████████ Diazepam ████████ lamotrigine ████████ mirtazapine ████████ pregabalin ████████ zopiclone 9. On 28/4/25 despite a recent self-reported admitted overdose of prescription medication of ████████ ████████████████████████████████████████ Miss Jones was prescribed ████████ ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ 10. Miss Jones died on 13/5/25 from the combined toxic effects of a fatal level of amitriptyline along with an excessive amount of zopiclone. 11. The clinical lead at Cranstoun had previously had discussions with the GP about reducing Miss Jones prescription for zopiclone. 12. No medication review appears to have taken place after Miss Jones self-reported overdose of prescribed medication nor after concerns were raised by Cranstoun. 13. GMC Guidance requires a practitioner to prescribe drugs or treatment including repeat prescriptions, only when they have adequate knowledge of the patient’s health and are satisfied that the drugs or treatment serve the patient’s needs and to keep clear, accurate and legible records, reporting the relevant clinical findings, the decisions made. 14. There is no clinical rationale recorded for the continued prescribing of Miss Jones’s repeat medications in terms of managing Miss Jones’s risk of overdose given her recent disclosure e.g. reducing the frequency to 7 days rather than 28 days. 15. There is no evidence of any medication review having taken place after Miss Jones’s disclosure of overdose of prescription medication or prior to her repeat prescriptions being issued on 6/2/25, 27/3/25 or 28/4/25. Her last reported medication review was on 23/8/24. ”

    Source location

    Danielle Monique Christina JONES · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Amend the self-harm follow-up policy to require medication review and consideration of reducing prescription quantities where ongoing risk exists.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will amend our follow up policy to specifically mention the need for medication review at the time of pro-active follow up, and in particular to consider reducing the amount of medication per prescription if there is any ongoing risk of further self-harm and especially with high-risk medications.”

    Source location

    Response from Your Health Partnership Regis Medical Centre
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 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

    Amend the self-harm risk-assessment template to record medication review discussions, stockpiling, medication safety, prescription quantity, and medication supervision options.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will amend our risk assessment template to include a mental health medication review code and free text advice regarding the following with a free text box to record discussions.”

    Source location

    Response from Your Health Partnership Regis Medical Centre
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 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

    Expand the annual proactive self-harm follow-up audit to record medication reviews and discussions about prescribed medication quantities.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will re-launch this amended policy in January 2026 with our clinicians and add the recording of medication review and recording of consideration of reducing amount of medication on each issue as part of the annual audit program.”

    Source location

    Response from Your Health Partnership Regis Medical Centre
    Page 4 · response
    Published 29 October 2025

    Open published response
  2. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Kim Jeannette ROBINSON · 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

    Kim Robinson died at home in Suffolk on 12 May 2024 after toxicological analysis identified a significantly toxic level of a medication obtained from an online pharmacy. The report identified concerns that the online prescriber could not access her GP records, the ordering process used incorrect details, and the medication was delivered in a quantity that gave her direct access to a fatal amount. The report stated that the online prescription system needed review.

    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 limit online prescription quantities according to possible lethal dose

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Following Kim’s tragic death the GP who had prescribed the prescription of ████████ to Kim, reviewed the current online system in place and identified five areas where in his evidence he identified changes could be made. The GP stated there was:- a) The need for online prescribers to be able to access a patient’s records (at least the Summary Care Records). These records could be attached to the consultation for review by the prescriber. b) All patients could be asked for consent to share the details of their prescriptions with their current GP and/or regular practitioner. When consent is given, it was suggested a notice should be sent to these healthcare providers at the same time the medicine is delivered to the patient. Without such consent, the patient’s order should not be accepted. c) Prescribers could have the ability to add comments when reviewing a consultation, whether it is approved or vetoed. d) All consultations could include the question: “Have you ever had suicidal behaviour or thoughts?” e) Prescriptions could be also for smaller quantities, taking into account the possible lethal dose of the medicine. If necessary, dispensing should be limited to weekly or reduced frequencies. Had these features been present on the on-line system, the GP stated he would not have issued a prescription of ████████ to Kim. In light of the evidence heard in this case I believe the current system of on-line prescription service needs to be reviewed. 2. It is of note, that the matter of concern regarding the ease in obtaining online prescriptions was previously raised by this court on 15th November 2019 in a Prevention of Future Death report following the tragic death of Deborah Headspeath on 3rd August 2017. ”

    Source location

    Kim Jeannette ROBINSON · 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

    The prescriber is responsible for decisions on prescription quantities, while service providers must maintain adequate controls and may advise on prescription duration.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Relevant to your concern that ‘prescriptions could be also for smaller quantities, taking into account the possible lethal dose of the medicine. If necessary, dispensing should be limited to weekly or reduced frequencies’, The responsibility for prescribing rests with the prescriber who has clinical responsibility for that particular aspect of a patient’s care. Issuing shorter prescriptions could give the prescriber the opportunity to review the patient’s medicines, which is important for some groups of patients and may therefore be particularly appropriate in some cases. The service provider, whether NHS commissioner or private sector provider has a responsibility to ensure that adequate controls are in place, and they may also issue advice to prescribers about the length of time for which prescriptions should be issued.”

    Source location

    Response from DHSC
    Page 3 · response
    Published 31 January 2025

    Open published response
  3. Cheshire

    AI-generated summary

    Alexandra Bronte Roberts · 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

    Alexandra Bronte Roberts, who had a history of mental health issues, self-harm and Type 1 diabetes, died after intentionally overdosing on her prescribed insulin on 13 May 2023. The principal concern was that insulin could only be prescribed in pre-filled pens containing around 10 days’ supply, enabling access to a large overdose, whereas smaller amounts could have reduced the risk.

    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

    Inability to prescribe smaller quantities of insulin

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The minimum amount of insulin available to be prescribed at the time of Alex’s death was 300 units, amounting to around 10 days of medication for Alex, enabling her to take a large overdose. The Court heard evidence that had it been possible to prescribe a smaller amount, the smaller amount would have been prescribed so as to reduce the risk of overdose. ”

    Source location

    Alexandra Bronte Roberts · 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

    The MHRA is the more appropriate organisation to respond to concerns about the insulin doses currently available to patients.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As your Report notes, the smallest quantity of insulin within a single pen device is currently 300 units of insulin. You may wish to refer to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) as the UK’s regulator of medicines regarding your concerns, as they would be the more appropriate organisation to respond on the insulin doses currently available to patients.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 January 2025

    Open published response
  4. Derby and Derbyshire

    AI-generated summary

    Debra BATES · 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

    Debra Bates was found dead at home on 15 June 2023. Post-mortem toxicology found prescribed medication at above therapeutic levels, and the evidence indicated that a mixture of medication had an enhanced sedative and respiratory depressant effect. A prior recommendation to change her prescriptions from weekly supplies to a three-day and four-day cycle was not implemented; concerns included the continuation of weekly prescribing and insufficient investigation of how to implement the proposed approach safely.

    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 limit prescription quantities to an appropriate 3- or 4-day supply

    Wider context from the report

    “A recommendation had been made by ████████, Consultant Psychiatrist for regular prescriptions to be supplied (blisters) on a 3 days followed by a 4 days cycle. This would limit the amount of prescription medication available to her at anyone time. Debra Bates had a chaotic prescription pill use which appears to be fuelling her turbulence The dispensing pharmacist said that non blister pack 3 and 4 day prescription can be facilitated. These could be post dated to be collected on Tuesdays and Fridays for example. A task was sent to the practice pharmacist to discuss the case. The response was that 3 and 4 day prescriptions could cause confusion as double items would need to be added to the repeat prescription for each duration. This would result in more frequent deliveries and could cause issues. The regular prescriptions continued to be issued weekly (7 days) In evidence ████████ said there would be a risk of over prescribing because by mistake a request for a 4 day prescription would be selected on the computer screen rather than a 3 day No further investigation or inquiries were made as to how other practices implemented this prescribing approach in a case where there are multiple medications (including controlled drugs) or whether / what safety measures are available on the computer system, to prevent / minimise the risk of the wrong prescription being requested ”

    Source location

    Debra BATES · 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 and circulate a standard operating procedure for safely managing three- and four-day prescriptions, including clinician-only issuing, scheduling, alerts, coding and regular review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A draft SOP was prepared and discussed with the PCN Pharmacist on 18 July 2024. Amendments were made to remove any direct role for the PCN Pharmacists as they did not feel there was sufficient capacity within their team to respond in a timely manner to urgent requests. The SOP was reviewed and agreed at the Partners meeting the same day. The Lead GP for Mental”

    Source location

    Response from Park Surgery Heanor
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 July 2024

    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

    Consult local practices and the ICB prescribing team about managing frequent prescriptions and incorporate relevant learning into the practice SOP.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “iii. Contact prescribing lead GPs in other local PCN Practices to enquire about experience with (and policies for) managing twice weekly prescriptions.”

    Source location

    Response from Park Surgery Heanor
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 July 2024

    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 the three- and four-day prescribing SOP in July 2025.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3. The SOP will be reviewed in July 2025.”

    Source location

    Response from Park Surgery Heanor
    Page 3 · response
    Published 4 July 2024

    Open published response
  5. Rutland and North Leicestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Nigel Walter 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

    Nigel Walter Dixon, a 64-year-old man who lived alone, was found dead at home on 13 February 2023 after being unable to be roused. His cause of death was morphine and Zopiclone toxicity. Concerns included his access to morphine after hospital discharge and the online supply of large quantities and dosages of Zopiclone without adequate checks, communication with his GP, or safeguards.

    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

    Sale of online drugs in doses and quantities larger than ordinarily prescribed

    Wider context from the report

    “Mr Dixon was able to purchase ████████ Zopiclone tablets ████████ online from a company ████████ The GP who gave evidence at the inquest described this as a “huge” amount of the drug. She confirmed that she would only prescribe 28 days’ worth of ████████ tablets in one go (████████ Mr Dixon was able to purchase). The selling of tablets which are a larger dose and in a much larger quantity than would ordinarily be prescribed online risks an accidental or intentional overdose of the drug and also risks the drug being sold on the black market. ”

    Source location

    Nigel Walter DIXON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to control duplicate, excessive or frequent online drug purchases

    Wider context from the report

    “It is gravely concerning that powerful drugs are available online so freely and in such large quantities, with little to nothing in the way of checks and balances around who the drugs are being sold to. There seems to be no regulation of the supply of these drugs and that seems to me to inevitably put the lives of vulnerable people at risk. In this case there was no communication with Mr Dixon’s GP and I would imagine there is no way for these online companies to check whether their customers are placing duplicate orders with other websites, there seems therefore to be a situation where one could purchase almost limitless amounts of these drugs with no checks or balances at all. There seems to be no system for establishing the suitability of the purchaser, nor a system to limit the amount or frequency of medication being purchased. ”

    Source location

    Nigel Walter DIXON · 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

    Investigate the illicit website through the MHRA criminal enforcement process.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The MHRA can confirm that the website in question is subject to an active criminal investigation, and that arrests had been made prior to the issuing of the Regulation 28 Report. The MHRA has also issued multiple formal requests to the registrar (the company that manages the website's domain name) to suspend the website, which has thus far been unsuccessful. Other MHRA efforts to minimise the risk this website poses to the public have included:”

    Source location

    Joint response from DHSC and Department of Science Information and Technology (on behalf of DCMS)
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2024

    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

    Disrupt access to the illicit website through search-engine delisting, parental-control blocking, industry referrals and registry takedown requests.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The MHRA can confirm that the website in question is subject to an active criminal investigation, and that arrests had been made prior to the issuing of the Regulation 28 Report. The MHRA has also issued multiple formal requests to the registrar (the company that manages the website's domain name) to suspend the website, which has thus far been unsuccessful. Other MHRA efforts to minimise the risk this website poses to the public have included:”

    Source location

    Joint response from DHSC and Department of Science Information and Technology (on behalf of DCMS)
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2024

    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 targeted ISP filtering with search engines and UK internet service providers to block harmful online medicines content.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Through a combination of public empowerment, technological innovation, traditional methods of law enforcement and close collaboration with partners, the MHRA is constantly working to develop new and innovative ways to tackle the online trade in illegal medicines. Some of these future criminal countermeasures will include:”

    Source location

    Joint response from DHSC and Department of Science Information and Technology (on behalf of DCMS)
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 June 2024

    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

    Explore preventative online-safety measures with Ofcom under the Online Safety Act.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Through a combination of public empowerment, technological innovation, traditional methods of law enforcement and close collaboration with partners, the MHRA is constantly working to develop new and innovative ways to tackle the online trade in illegal medicines. Some of these future criminal countermeasures will include:”

    Source location

    Joint response from DHSC and Department of Science Information and Technology (on behalf of DCMS)
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 June 2024

    Open published response
  6. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Tracy Frances MCCARTHY · 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

    Tracy McCarthy was found deceased at home on 17 July 2023 and died from long-term misuse of amitriptyline; the inquest conclusion was a drug-related death, with amitriptyline toxicity and coronary artery disease recorded. The concerns included prescribing amitriptyline above the maximum suggested dose, failure to flag the overdose risk and stop or appropriately manage the prescription, and changing from daily to monthly prescriptions despite recognised risks.

    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 maintain daily amitriptyline dispensing to mitigate overdose risk

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Ms McCarthy’s Amitriptyline prescriptions had previously been issued on a daily basis, to mitigate the risk of overdose. However, following her admission to hospital (mentioned above) a GP at The Tredegar Practice took the decision to reduce the dose slightly, but transfer to monthly prescriptions, thereby allowing Ms McCarthy access to 28 days’ worth of Amitriptyline all at once. A GP from The Tredegar Practice told me that they thought this was “risky” but said that the GP who made that decision was not familiar with the patient and maybe wouldn’t have known the rationale for daily prescriptions. They also told me that the Practice was probably “over-reliant on the knowledge of particular doctors that treated her.” The concern is that too great an emphasis was placed on the knowledge of a few individuals, which led to acknowledged risks not being put in the records in a way that would alert any practitioner to them. ”

    Source location

    Tracy Frances MCCARTHY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Joshua Arthur Stafford Delaney · 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

    Joshua Arthur Stafford Delaney, aged 19, had a history of mental illness, suicidal ideation and previous suicide attempts. On 19 January 2020, he took a large overdose of Propranolol, was found collapsed, and died despite resuscitation attempts. The principal concern was that GPs may not be aware of the risk of fatal Propranolol overdose and may prescribe quantities to people at risk, potentially causing future deaths.

    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 limit quantities of Propranolol prescribed to people at risk of overdose

    Wider context from the report

    “The evidence of the General Practitioner in this case was to the effect that prior to this death, neither he nor his colleagues were aware that Propranolol carried any significant risk of death through deliberate overdose. The evidence of the doctor in question was that because of this specific incident, there has been a change in their approach to prescribing of Propranolol at his GP surgery, with smaller quantities prescribed (1 to 10 patients who might be at risk of taking an overdose. Shortly after this incident (11 February 2020) there was, coincidentally, an article in the British Medical Journal in respect of Propranolol, ("Doctors and paramedics must be better prepared to deal with propranolol overdoses"). However, the doctor’s evidence in the inquest was that he did not believe that GPs generally were currently aware of the risk of Propranolol overdoses. The evidence from the Consultant Psychiatrist from the Community Mental Health Team was that they would not usually prescribe Propranolol, and he also considered that GPs may not be aware of the overdose risk posed by the drug. The inquest also heard from the toxicologist, who gave evidence that her anecdotal experience was that there had in recent years been a significant number of deaths caused by Propranolol overdoses. In the circumstances, I am concerned that doctors in General Practice may not be aware of the risks of fatal overdose from Propranolol, and that in the absence of greater awareness by GPs, the prescription of quantities of Propranolol to those at risk may cause future deaths. ”

    Source location

    Joshua Arthur Stafford Delaney · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. Sunderland

    AI-generated summary

    Jason Brown · 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

    Jason Brown died at his home on 6 September 2022 after taking an overdose of his prescribed medication; the inquest concluded suicide, with the medical cause recorded as cardiac arrhythmia and drug overdose. The report raises concern that original-pack dispensing requirements for Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride could provide a patient with suicidal risk and previous overdose attempts with a large quantity of medication.

    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 prevent full-pack dispensing of Zuclopenthixol to patients prescribed weekly doses with suicidal risk and previous overdose attempts

    Wider context from the report

    “At the Inquest I heard evidence that prior to his death on 6th September 2022, Jason Brown received from the pharmacy his prescribed medication in a form of a full pack of ████████ tablets of Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride (clopixol). The pharmacy confirmed in evidence that this had been dispensed as a full pack in accordance with its special container status. Jason was prescribed his medication in weekly doses due to a history which included previous attempts to take an overdose of his medication. Jason received this full pack of tablets only 17 days before taking an overdose of this medication on 6th September 2022. The pharmacy also confirmed that another patient at the practice received the same medication in a 7-day monitored dosage system (MDS) but could not confirm whether the remaining pack was then disposed of for that patient. I am concerned that, due to a special container status, a box of ████████ tablets of Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride (clopixol) must be dispensed in its own special container as a full pack of ████████ tablets (original pack dispensing) and that this can endanger the safety of a patient with a history of suicidal risk and previous overdose attempts. Deaths may be prevented if the original pack dispensing guidance was reviewed for this medication. ”

    Source location

    Jason Brown · 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

    Raise concerns with the Department of Health and Social Care about clopixol pack sizes and special container status at forthcoming meetings.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will, however, raise concerns over Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride (clopixol) coming in packs of ████████ and having a special container status at forthcoming meetings with the DHSC. You might consider that the DHSC is a more appropriate body to include in this Regulation 28 Report as they are ultimately responsible for the regulatory system.”

    Source location

    Response from National Pharmacy Association
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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 stability data for Lundbeck zuclopenthixol tablets to support assessment of special container status.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Following your current request, Lundbeck Ltd has queried the NHS Business Authority on 13 March 2024, regarding the criteria for assigning products as special containers and included that stability data are available supporting the storage of zuclopenthixol 2mg tablets being kept out of the container for up to 4 weeks if required.”

    Source location

    Response from Lundbeck Ltd
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Consider communications to raise pharmacy-profession awareness of special-container quantity exceptions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Going forward, we will consider whether there are any communications we can issue to the pharmacy professions to raise awareness, including about the exceptions to the rules around quantity to supply for special containers.”

    Source location

    Response from General Pharmaceutical Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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

    Determining whether a particular medicine has special container status is outside the respondent’s influence and authority.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The NPA has no influence over determining if/whether a particular medicine has a special container status. We can only advise our member pharmacies to follow the special container status rules as set out by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) in the Drug Tariff (Part II Clause 10), and Schedule 4 of the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical and Local Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 2013, which all pharmacy contractors are required to follow.”

    Source location

    Response from National Pharmacy Association
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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 Department of Health and Social Care is ultimately responsible for the regulatory system and is the more appropriate body to address the matter.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will, however, raise concerns over Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride (clopixol) coming in packs of ████████ and having a special container status at forthcoming meetings with the DHSC. You might consider that the DHSC is a more appropriate body to include in this Regulation 28 Report as they are ultimately responsible for the regulatory system.”

    Source location

    Response from National Pharmacy Association
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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

    Responsibility for action on the Prevention of Future Deaths report rests with the General Pharmaceutical Council, whose response closes the regulatory review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Patient safety is our top priority, and we carefully consider the findings of all Prevention of Future Death reports. The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) is responsible for action for the Prevention of Future Deaths, and I can confirm that the response led by the GPhC also closes the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency review. The GPhC led on the response to the report, shared on 7 May 2024, for which we support the response.”

    Source location

    Response from MHRA
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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 manufacturer does not specify or classify the product as requiring special container status in its regulatory documents.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Lundbeck Ltd does not specify, classify, or make any reference to zuclopenthixol 2mg tablets, nor any strength of Lundbeck branded zuclopenthixol tablets as requiring “special container status” within the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) or any regulatory documents associated with this product. This classification is assigned and assigned independently².”

    Source location

    Response from Lundbeck Ltd
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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 NHS Business Services Authority independently assigns special container status under the applicable Drug Tariff criteria.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The criteria for assigning products as special containers are listed within the NHS England and Wales Drug Tariff (Part II, Clause 10B)² and the NHS Business Service Authority (NHSBSA) implement the criteria.”

    Source location

    Response from Lundbeck Ltd
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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

    Licensing, medicine status and pack size fall outside the respondent’s direct regulatory role.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has a statutory purpose to protect patients by setting and upholding the standards for registered pharmacies and the standards for pharmacy professionals, to ensure that registered pharmacies are safe to provide services, and that pharmacy professionals are fit to practise. We do not have a direct role in relation to the licensing, status or pack size of medicines. These would be matters for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the Department of Health and Social Care and the medicines manufacturer. However, we do have a role in supporting professionals to meet our standards and to dispense safely, taking account of relevant national policy and guidelines.”

    Source location

    Response from General Pharmaceutical Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    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 MHRA, Department of Health and Social Care, and manufacturer are responsible for medicine licensing, status and pack size.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has a statutory purpose to protect patients by setting and upholding the standards for registered pharmacies and the standards for pharmacy professionals, to ensure that registered pharmacies are safe to provide services, and that pharmacy professionals are fit to practise. We do not have a direct role in relation to the licensing, status or pack size of medicines. These would be matters for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the Department of Health and Social Care and the medicines manufacturer. However, we do have a role in supporting professionals to meet our standards and to dispense safely, taking account of relevant national policy and guidelines.”

    Source location

    Response from General Pharmaceutical Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 March 2024

    Open published response
  9. Mid Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Sarah Rhiannon Keen · 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

    Sarah Keen, who had a history of mental health difficulties and required support with daily activities, died after being discharged from hospital to supported accommodation. A post-mortem examination determined the medical cause of death to be multi-drug toxicity involving fluoxetine and dihydrocodeine in the presence of cocaine. The principal concerns were inadequate communication to carers about her risks and medication, insufficient guidance about discharge medication, and use of an abbreviation that was not universally understood.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to document and communicate discharge medication recommendations

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The note left by the psychiatrist on the medical records did not contain any recommendations as to medication. The psychiatrist was aware that Sarah’s medication was being held by her support workers as a result of the risk of mismanagement by overdosing. He was also aware that it was policy for the hospital to dispense 14 days of medication on discharge. He did not consider asking the discharging doctor to not provide Sarah with any medication on the basis that there was already a prescription in the community and although he considered that it was appropriate for the quantity of discharge medication to be reduced to seven days to reduce the risk of overdose, he did not communicate this to the medical team within the note. ”

    Source location

    Sarah Rhiannon Keen · 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

    Record when a reduced medication quantity should be prescribed because of self-harm or overdose risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The discharging clinician (both or either DGT and KMPT) should record if a reduced amount of medication should be prescribed because of risk of self-harm or overdose.”

    Source location

    Response from Darent Valley Trust and Kent & Medway NHS and Social Partnership
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 March 2024

    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

    State in discharge notifications when medication has been reduced and record the reason.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The discharge notification should indicate that a reduced amount of medication has been prescribed and the reason for this recorded.”

    Source location

    Response from Darent Valley Trust and Kent & Medway NHS and Social Partnership
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 March 2024

    Open published response
  10. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Sarah Julie MITCHELL · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Sarah Julie MITCHELL, who had a history of chronic back pain, medication dependence, and previous overdoses, was found deceased at her residence on 22 September 2022. The post-mortem found multiple drug toxicity from prescribed medication. The principal concerns were that she received 28 days’ worth of medication in less than 48 hours despite known overdose and hoarding risks, and that emergency department staff had no process for accessing relevant medication records and dispensing information.

    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 limit medication dispensing in line with overdose-risk controls

    Wider context from the report

    “The provision to Ms. MITCHELL of 28 days’ worth of prescribed medication in less than a 48-hour period (14 days’ worth of medication dispensed on each occasion she was discharged hospital on the 3rd and 4th of August 2022). This occurred at a time when, due to concerns about Ms. MITCHELL hoarding medication and taking an overdose, she was receiving weekly medication prescriptions from her GP to control this risk. The evidence heard at Inquest indicated that there was no process in place whereby accident and emergency staff could access Ms. MITCHELL’s medical records detailing the medication she was receiving and the rationale behind the dispensing regime in place. ”

    Source location

    Sarah Julie MITCHELL · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Add a Summary Care Record sentence limiting controlled medication following an overdose diagnosis to no more than a 48-hour supply.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “From now on when a diagnosis of an overdose gets recorded we will add a sentence to give no more controlled medication than is needed for 48 hours, so they can contact the surgery again for a further supply after. This should be visible on the summary care record that the hospital is looking at.”

    Source location

    Response from Rosedale Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 January 2024

    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

    Change prescriptions to daily dispensing for patients admitted with more than one overdose within three months, until the risk period ends.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2. If a patient is admitted with more than 1 overdose within a 3 month period we will change their prescription to daily until they have not to overdose or overdose on their medication.”

    Source location

    Response from Rosedale Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 January 2024

    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

    James Paget University Hospitals NHS Trust should provide information about the deceased’s care, including prescribing policies and the concerns raised.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England would refer you to James Paget University Hospitals NHS Trust for further information on Sarah’s care and your concerns, including their prescribing policies and we note that you have also addressed your Report to them. We understand that the Trust has contacted the coroner to clarify some of the issues referenced within your Report. We have been asked to be sighted on their response and will consider this carefully once we are in receipt.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 3 · response
    Published 19 January 2024

    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 Trust disputes that 28 days of medication were supplied, stating that the first discharge involved only a 10-day fluoxetine supply.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Provision of Prescribed Medication I have received assurance from the Trust’s Chief Pharmacist that the only medication which Ms Mitchell was given upon her first discharge, on 3rd August 2022, was one box of Fluoxetine ████████ capsules, equating to a 10 day supply. This is evidenced in the Trust’s dispensing record for this patient as illustrated below:”

    Source location

    Response from James Paget University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 January 2024

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026