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. Manchester North

    AI-generated summary

    Jane Allison Powell · 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

    Jane Allison Powell was found deceased at home on 6 December 2016 after last being seen alive between 25 and 28 November 2016. The probable cause of death was multiple drug toxicity, and the report raised concern about the ease of obtaining large amounts of medication, including prescription-only drugs, over the internet and the risk of 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

    Easy online access to large amounts of medication, including prescription-only drugs

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence in this case demonstrated how easy it is for individuals to obtain large amounts of medication (including those normally deemed to be ‘prescription only’ drugs) over the internet. Whilst this problem has already been recognised by the pharmaceutical profession and its regulatory body, it is unclear what action has been/is being taken in order to address the situation. My concern is that, if left, there is a significant risk of future deaths. ”

    Source location

    Jane Allison Powell · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  2. South Yorkshire (Eastern)

    AI-generated summary

    Craig Stuart Hamilton · 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

    Craig Stuart Hamilton died on 8 December 2016 from acute tramadol toxicity after taking excess Tramadol to relieve chronic pain and sleep before working the next day. The principal concerns were the absence of clear procedures for managing patients who obtain or take more medication than prescribed, and insufficient exploration of medication regimes, alternative pain management, and discussions about exceeding prescribed dosages.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of procedures to monitor and manage repeat prescriptions exceeding prescribed dosages

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Absence of clear procedures to monitor and manage patients who endeavour to obtain repeat prescriptions such that it takes them beyond the prescribed dosages. ”

    Source location

    Craig Stuart Hamilton · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · 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

    Lack of procedures to manage access to medication amounts exceeding prescribed quantities

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Absence of clear procedures to manage patients who routinely access larger amounts of medication than actually prescribed. ”

    Source location

    Craig Stuart Hamilton · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Identify patients prescribed tramadol and other potentially harmful medicines, review prescribing indications, doses and issue patterns, and recommend contact, early review or no change.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We took immediate action on the afternoon of the request to identify the patients being prescribed tramadol and extended the search to other medicines with the potential for self-harm. All electronic prescriptions were changed to paper format and passed to the doctors for review before signing. All names of patients identified were passed to one of the partners to perform a review of the computer notes and make a recommendation. The inspection included * the indication for the medicine * the recommended dose on the prescription * the recent historical issue pattern”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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

    Convert electronic prescriptions to paper prescriptions requiring doctor review before signing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We took immediate action on the afternoon of the request to identify the patients being prescribed tramadol and extended the search to other medicines with the potential for self-harm. All electronic prescriptions were changed to paper format and passed to the doctors for review before signing. All names of patients identified were passed to one of the partners to perform a review of the computer notes and make a recommendation. The inspection included * the indication for the medicine * the recommended dose on the prescription * the recent historical issue pattern”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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

    Seek medicines-management, drugs-and-alcohol, and pharmacist input on difficult or potentially problematic prescriptions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have met several times as partners. We have sought advice from the Clinical Commissioning Group, particularly the Medicines Management Team. We asked the Drugs and Alcohol Team for advice and assistance in dealing with more difficult cases. Our local pharmacist was alerted to the problem and invited to provide information on prescriptions his team thought problematic.”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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

    Call patients identified as potential over-users of tramadol for early review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The search showed that 79 of our 90 patients taking tramadol were not abusing the drug. Action has been taken to limit the potential over-users by calling them in for early review.”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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 a thorough review of medication ordering and review procedures to identify safety problems.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have discovered that our procedures for issue and review of medication were not satisfactory.”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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 repeat-prescribing policy for all medicines and implement amended repeat-prescribing and acute-prescribing protocols with strengthened electronic prompts and consultation processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since this incident our practice attitude has changed. We have changed our policy for repeat prescribing of all medication, not just tramadol.”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    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

    Explain the amended prescribing protocols and procedures to all practice staff during protected time within 10 days.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The enclosed protocols have been examined by GP partners and practice manager. I am to explain to all staff in the practice, in protected time, the changes within 10 days.”

    Source location

    2017-0197-Response-by-Manor-Field-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 August 2017

    Open published response
  3. Berkshire

    AI-generated summary

    Mr George Arthur Cheese · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Mr George Arthur Cheese, an 18-year-old man, was found hanging in woodland near his home on 9 April 2015. He had anxiety and depression with suicidal thoughts, and concerns were raised about the amount of Fluoxetine prescribed and the absence of a flag to limit repeat medication supplies.

    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 the amount of antidepressant medication prescribed to patients with suicidal thoughts

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Mr Cheese was prescribed Fluoxetine anti-depressant medication on the 3rd November 2014 by a treating GP, following admitting to fleeting suicidal thoughts. He was reviewed by ████████ on 14th January 2015 when Mr Cheese described daily episodes of intense low mood with suicidal thoughts which included taking an overdose. This led to a reference to the Mental Health Team. At an appointment with the Practice’s Nurse Practitioner on 3rd February, Mr Cheese was prescribed 112 tablets of Fluoxetine. In the course of her evidence, ████████ stated that the Nurse Practitioner was probably just repeating the same prescription that the previous Doctor had issued to Mr Cheese but that she, ████████, would not have done that. (3) ████████ also acknowledged, in the course of her evidence, that there was no “flag” on Mr Cheese’s notes to alert treating Clinicians within the GP Practice to limit the amount of medication provided to Mr Cheese in view of his history. She acknowledged that a flag, in such circumstances, was good practice. (4) The concerns arising from the evidence are therefore the amount of medication prescribed to a patient who was known to be suffering from mental health issues and describing suicidal thoughts and a potential overdose and the fact that this was not being flagged to prevent large amounts of medication being provided to him as a matter of repeat prescription. ”

    Source location

    Mr George Arthur Cheese · 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

    Require GPs to conduct repeat-prescription issuance and depression reviews.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Shortly after George died the partners introduced the requirement for the issue of repeat prescriptions and depression reviews to be conducted by GPs only; receptionists are aware that patients with anxiety and depression cannot be seen by nurse practitioners. This policy has been circulated to all our GPs and nurses/nurse practitioners. The addition of a flag - or ‘major alert’ - on the front screen of the patient’s record is the responsibility of the GP who initially assesses or reviews the patient should they have concerns at any time. This could include receiving a letter from Talking Therapies expressing concern about a patient’s suicidal thoughts.”

    Source location

    2017-0179-Response-by-Woodley-Centre-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 August 2017

    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

    Require the assessing or reviewing GP to add a major alert when concerned about a patient’s risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Shortly after George died the partners introduced the requirement for the issue of repeat prescriptions and depression reviews to be conducted by GPs only; receptionists are aware that patients with anxiety and depression cannot be seen by nurse practitioners. This policy has been circulated to all our GPs and nurses/nurse practitioners. The addition of a flag - or ‘major alert’ - on the front screen of the patient’s record is the responsibility of the GP who initially assesses or reviews the patient should they have concerns at any time. This could include receiving a letter from Talking Therapies expressing concern about a patient’s suicidal thoughts.”

    Source location

    2017-0179-Response-by-Woodley-Centre-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 August 2017

    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

    Discuss the significant event at the next clinical meeting.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I have written up the role of the clinicians including the issue of 112 capsules of fluoxetine to George on 2 occasions as a ‘significant event’ and will be discussing this at our next clinical meeting on Thursday 27th July. Analysis of significant events is a requirement of the CQC (Care Quality Commission) inspection to demonstrate that events that have been detrimental to patient care have been identified, discussed and lessons have been learnt with the aim of improving the quality of care. We have also arranged for a consultant psychiatrist from the local mental health team to talk about management of mental health disorders at our clinical meeting scheduled for Wednesday 23rd August.”

    Source location

    2017-0179-Response-by-Woodley-Centre-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 August 2017

    Open published response
  4. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Philip Richard David BREATNACH · 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

    Philip Richard David Breatnach's circumstances are referred to in the Record of Inquest. The concerns relate to online applications for medication, inadequate checking of answers and failure to contact his GP, and the prescribing of Dihydrocodeine by a prescriber who had not seen him, including concerns about the quantity, suitability for migraine, and dosing instructions. The inquest concluded with a finding of MISADVENTURE (DEPENDENCE ON DRUGS).

    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

    Excessive quantities of Dihydrocodeine prescribed

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Mr Breatnach (and anybody else) is able to apply online for medications (2) That applying online, if the application form is not thoroughly checked, allows the applicant to lie or give false or misleading answers to critical questions which is what Mr Breatnach did. (3) There was no evidence that the prescriber made any effort to contact Mr Breatnach’s GP to find out if the answers that he gave were true. (4) Prescribing Dihydrocodeine, a potentially addictive drug, used for the treatment of moderate to severe pain to a patient who the prescriber has never seen appears to fly in the face of good prescribing practice. (5) The amount of Dihydrocodeine prescribed appears to be excessive. (6) I understand from the evidence that I heard at the Inquest that Dihydrocodeine should not be prescribed for migraine which is the reason Mr Breatnach gave for asking for this medication. (7) The instructions were that the Dihydrocodeine should be taken every four to six hours as required. The evidence at the Inquest was that taking Dihydrocodeine in this way, potentially suggesting that eight tablets could or should be taken every twenty four hours until the whole of the one hundred and twenty six tablets given are used up is I heard not the way Dihydrocodeine should be prescribed. (8) Prescribing this number of tablets would therefore seem to be completely inappropriate and fails to understand that medications such as Dihydrocodeine can be used as currency. The medication came in three packets – one containing one hundred tablets and the other two containing twenty eight tablets each. The two packets containing twenty eight tablets each were never found and this raises the possibility that Mr Breatnach was able to sell them, although I have no evidence that he did. (9) This way of prescribing completely undermines the diligent and careful GP’s efforts to control this man’s medication over use. ”

    Source location

    Philip Richard David BREATNACH · 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

    Work with partner agencies to consolidate regulatory and professional guidance on online prescribing and medicine supply.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The group agreed to work together to assimilate current regulatory and professional guidance into one place so there is greater clarity regarding good practice in respect of online prescribing and supply of medicines giving particular guidance on medicines such as controlled drugs and antibiotics.”

    Source location

    2016-0330-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 September 2016

    Open published response
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Christine Marie Stevenson · 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

    Christine Marie Stevenson, who had a history of illicit drug use and multiple medical issues, died at home on 21 July 2015. The inquest recorded the cause of death as combined drug toxicity from prescribed and illicit drug use. Concerns were raised about the lack of control over Oramorph prescribing, including the issue of 500 ml, equivalent to 1000 mg, without controls despite evidence that 50 ml could pose a risk to life in a naïve user.

    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 control the quantity of Oramorph solution prescribed

    Wider context from the report

    “Concerns were raised at the Inquest as to the lack of control for Oramorph medication. A 10mgs per 5ml solution does not fall under the controlled drug requirements in the BNF. It is noted that whilst the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 lists morphine as a Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A Controlled drug, Section 5 gives an exemption for preparation that contain not more than 0.2% morphine Oramorph (10 mg per 5 millilitres) has a morphine content that is under the 0.2% (as the 10 mg is present as morphine sulphate). However even though the solution at this strength is not to be subject of control, should there be restrictions on the amount of the solution which can be prescribed? This lady was prescribed 500mls (a total available dose of 1000 mg) of this solution which poses as a dose serious risk to health. The Court heard evidence that in a naïve user 50mls of the solution at this strength can be a risk to life. Given that Oramorph has an increasing street value and is a commonly abused drug whilst the strength of the solution may not require control the issuing of 500mls without control seems a matter which requires consideration. ”

    Source location

    Christine Marie Stevenson · 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

    Raise concerns about prescribed controlled-drug volumes and strengths through the network and provide guidance to prescribers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Greater Manchester along with all areas of NHS England has established Local Intelligence Networks where information is shared across a network of healthcare providers such as hospitals, hospices, private hospitals, clinics, the police, the Care Quality Commission, and regulators such as the General Pharmaceutical Council. The Network meets twice a year to share learning concerning controlled drugs and more recently “legal highs”. We are going to raise the issue concerning the volumes and strengths of controlled drugs prescribed and provide guidance to prescribers.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Examine the controlled-drug incident reporting system to identify high-volume prescribers and question the reasons for high-volume prescribing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Greater Manchester has a web based reporting system where all providers report incidents involving controlled drugs. This means we have real time data of incidents across the Network so early warnings can be distributed. We will examine the system to identify high volume prescribers and question reasons for prescribing high volumes.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Operate a web-based controlled-drug incident reporting system with real-time data and provider alerts for possible abuse.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Greater Manchester has a web based reporting system where all providers report incidents involving controlled drugs. This means we have real time data of incidents across the Network so early warnings can be distributed. We will examine the system to identify high volume prescribers and question reasons for prescribing high volumes.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Highlight high-volume controlled-drug prescribing in the Care Quality Commission’s next national Controlled Drugs Vigilance Newsletter.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• We have shared your letter with the Local Intelligence Network (LIN); one of the recommendations from the group was to highlight the issue of prescribing high volumes of controlled drugs in the next national newsletter from the Care Quality Commission “Controlled Drugs Vigilance Newsletter”, which is published every two months; Karen O’Brien will take this recommendation forward as a member of this group.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Prescribers, rather than the respondent, are responsible for deciding appropriate Oramorph prescriptions and volumes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The second issue you raise is concerning the volume of Oramorph prescribed which in this instance was 500ml and whether this could restricted. Prescribers are aware they are responsible for all prescriptions they sign (EL(91)127). This Executive Letter states clinical responsibilities lies with the clinician who signs the prescription. This means they should prescribe appropriately for each patient and this has been reinforced to all new prescribers and existing prescribers since 1991.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Existing prescribing guidance advises keeping drug volumes to a minimum while allowing higher volumes for patients with legitimate end-of-life needs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “All prescribers are advised to keep the prescribed volume of drugs to a minimum especially with controlled drugs. Patients taking drugs such as morphine do find that over time they need increasing doses to control their symptoms and this varies greatly between patients. Limiting the volume of Oramorph prescribed may disadvantage some patients who are legitimately on a high dose at the end of their life.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Restricting Oramorph volumes could disadvantage legitimate patients who require high doses at the end of life.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “All prescribers are advised to keep the prescribed volume of drugs to a minimum especially with controlled drugs. Patients taking drugs such as morphine do find that over time they need increasing doses to control their symptoms and this varies greatly between patients. Limiting the volume of Oramorph prescribed may disadvantage some patients who are legitimately on a high dose at the end of their life.”

    Source location

    Christine-Stevenson-Response
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    A daily maximum morphine dose cannot be set because individual pain-relief needs vary and a limit could harm patient care.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “My officials have consulted with other departments and agencies who have responsibility for prescribing opiate medicines for severe pain relief, including the Department of Health and the Care Quality Commission. The amount of morphine needed to give relief from severe pain varies enormously according to the needs of each individual. It is not possible to set a daily maximum dose. If a limit to the amount of Oramorph which can be prescribed were set, it may have unintended consequences and could have a negative impact on some patients’ care.”

    Source location

    2016-0123-Response-by-Home-Office
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The ACMD has been commissioned to examine harms from diversion and illicit supply of medicines, including controlled drugs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I also note your point about the missing 300mls of morphine sulphate. The diversion of prescription drugs into the illicit supply is taken very seriously, which is why the Home Secretary has commissioned the ACMD to “explore the potential for medical and social harms arising from the illicit supply of medicines – predominantly controlled drugs”.”

    Source location

    2016-0123-Response-by-Home-Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2016

    Open published response
  6. Exeter and Greater Devon

    AI-generated summary

    Judith Anne SAVILLE · 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

    Judith Anne Saville, who had a long history of agitated depression and previous psychiatric admissions and ECT treatment, was found deceased at home on 28 January 2014. The inquest concluded that she died from a Zopiclone and Paracetamol overdose and that she had taken her own life. Concerns included the quantity of medication prescribed, the need for warnings about a history of overdose in the practice’s computer system, and implementation and auditing of an action plan.

    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 supplies for patients with a history of prescribed-medication overdose

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) For the attention of ████████ In his evidence ████████ told the Court that Mrs Saville’s death had been reviewed at a significant events meeting in his practice. I was told that it was felt he had prescribed too much medication, particularly as the person who had a past medical history that included overdoses of prescribed medication. ████████ said that there was now an increased awareness on the Practitioners not to prescribe so much medication in similar circumstances. He felt that a supply of no more than a week’s worth of medication would be appropriate. ████████ said that the system could be made more robust by introducing a warning on the firm’s computer system. This would assist Practitioners by drawing to their attention a past medical history of overdose. It was felt that this may particularly be of benefit to locum doctors who would not necessarily have the same recall of a patient as a partner in the practice. ”

    Source location

    Judith Anne SAVILLE · 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 practice does not agree that too many zopiclone pills were prescribed, as no single prescription exceeded one month’s supply.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In the situation in which normally we prescribe Zopiclone, short courses of limited numbers of pills are advisable and our computer system automatically offers us this choice with a label which advises against repeat or regular use. There will inevitably be some patients for whom it has been decided that a regular prescription of one months supply is appropriate. In Mrs Saville’s particular circumstance we would not necessarily agree that ████████ prescribed too many zopiclone pills, although we sympathise with his comments. Viewing her prescribing records it appears that she was not prescribed on any single occasion more than a months supply at the dose ████████ had decided on. We would certainly all agree that in cases where there is a heightened risk of suicide we would endeavour to restrict all supplies of potentially toxic medication of any type.”

    Source location

    2015-0011-Response-by-Axminster-Medical-Practice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 January 2015

    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

    Existing computer prescribing prompts and pharmacist or dispenser alerts are considered sufficient safeguards for zopiclone prescribing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In the situation in which normally we prescribe Zopiclone, short courses of limited numbers of pills are advisable and our computer system automatically offers us this choice with a label which advises against repeat or regular use. There will inevitably be some patients for whom it has been decided that a regular prescription of one months supply is appropriate. In Mrs Saville’s particular circumstance we would not necessarily agree that ████████ prescribed too many zopiclone pills, although we sympathise with his comments. Viewing her prescribing records it appears that she was not prescribed on any single occasion more than a months supply at the dose ████████ had decided on. We would certainly all agree that in cases where there is a heightened risk of suicide we would endeavour to restrict all supplies of potentially toxic medication of any type.”

    Source location

    2015-0011-Response-by-Axminster-Medical-Practice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 January 2015

    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

    Restricting prescriptions cannot prevent patients from stockpiling regular medication or accessing other toxic medicines, including over-the-counter drugs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Our local pharmacists and dispensers do also flag to us when patients appear to be receiving medications earlier than would be expected. As you will understand however, restricting prescribed medications would not prevent patients who have chosen to “stockpile” regular medications from holding large numbers of any pill which we prescribe regularly. There are many medications which are much more toxic than zopiclone and of course many over the counter medications which would also be toxic in overdose.”

    Source location

    2015-0011-Response-by-Axminster-Medical-Practice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 January 2015

    Open published response
  7. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    Patricia Edge · 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

    Patricia Edge died at Royal Bolton Hospital on 20 July 2014 after bowel cancer, bowel obstruction and ischaemic bowel, with paracetamol liver toxicity also identified in the inquest conclusion. An excessive dose of paracetamol was prescribed and dispensed between 14 and 19 July 2014, and the report raised concerns about prescribing and dispensing procedures, review of the dose, and the absence of blood tests.

    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 staff training and Trust procedures to prevent prescribing and dispensing excessive paracetamol doses

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The circumstances – including training of staff and Trust procedures - in which a patient could be prescribed and dispensed an excessive dose of paracetamol on the 14ᵗʰ July 2014. ”

    Source location

    Patricia Edge · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review and revise paracetamol prescribing practice to require regular monitoring by the responsible clinical team.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Medical Devices Committee and the Medications Safety Group have worked closely to address these issues and the process for prescribing Paracetamol has been thoroughly reviewed. As a result the Trust has now revised its practice and this improvement will ensure that where patients are prescribed Paracetamol there will be regular monitoring by the clinical team responsible for the patient.”

    Source location

    2014-0531-Response-by-Bolton-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 December 2014

    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

    Distribute the SBAR safety communication to medical staff, wards and services using paracetamol, including through staff newsletters and bulletins.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The attached SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendations) slide details the seven actions taken by the Trust and addresses the three concerns that you have raised. An SBAR is a quality improvement tool which has been adopted by the Trust and is being used as a mechanism to communicate critical information to relevant staff and foster a culture of patient safety.”

    Source location

    2014-0531-Response-by-Bolton-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 December 2014

    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 Medicines Management e-learning module to reflect the improved paracetamol prescribing process and circulate the message continually to clinical staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, the Medicines Management e-learning module has been amended to reflect the improved process and ensure the message is continually circulated to clinical staff.”

    Source location

    2014-0531-Response-by-Bolton-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 December 2014

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    All reasonably practicable steps have been taken to improve paracetamol prescribing and address the identified concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are confident that the Trust has taken all reasonably practicable steps to improve the system of prescribing of Paracetamol in order to address your concerns and I do hope that my response has provided you with the assurance that you and the family are looking for. If you need any further information, or if I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.”

    Source location

    2014-0531-Response-by-Bolton-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 December 2014

    Open published response
  8. Exeter and Greater Devon

    AI-generated summary

    Andrew john Hooper · 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

    Andrew John Hooper died after taking methadone prescribed to his girlfriend, with the stated cause of death being respiratory failure, hypoxic brain injury and methadone toxicity. The concerns were that the medication was not secured, was available in a quantity sufficient for a fatal dose, and that the person prescribed it appeared unaware of the risks to others and unable to keep it safe.

    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

    Prescribing medication in quantities sufficient for a fatal dose

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The medication was not secured, and was prescribed in sufficient quantity for a fatal dose to be taken by a user un-used to this medication. (bottle 420ml) (2) the person to whom was prescribed appeared to be unaware of the dangers of this medication, when taken by another in large quantities. (3) Consideration should be given to the appropriateness of prescribing to an individual who is not able or prepared to keep the medication safe and secure, or is not aware of the dangers of ingestion, (deliberate or otherwise), for others. If this means daily prescription, the balance of inconvenience versus the safety of others should be carefully weighed on an individual basis, and evidence recorded in this regard. ”

    Source location

    Andrew john Hooper · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  9. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Teresa Lonergan · 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

    Teresa Lonergan, aged 73, was found dead at home on 4 September 2012 after taking an overdose of morphine that she had hoarded. The concerns included large quantities of prescribed morphine being available, repeat prescriptions and no reported monitoring of her consumption of controlled drugs.

    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

    Availability of potentially fatal quantities of morphine for overdose

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) At the scene the following bottles of morphine were found: 1 100 ml bottle 10mg/5mls 10% remaining, dated 21/02/12 1 100 ml bottle 10mg/5ml 30% remaining, dated 09/03/12 1 100 ml bottle 10mg/5ml 33% remaining, dated 08/05/12 1 100 ml bottle 10mg/5ml 75% remaining ? date 1 100 ml bottle 10mg/5ml, full, dated 13/07/12 and 3 loose strips of 10mg Zomorph with 23 of 28 remaining It was calculated that if the liquid morphine alone was considered there was 340mg available. The pathologist advised that 100 to 200mg would probably be sufficient to cause a fatality. (2) She was a retired matron. She was visited twice daily by her care worker, who opened her bottles for her as she was not able to do so herself. She did not report any medical instructions from doctors about administration or monitoring. Her GP issued repeat prescriptions of: 10mg Zomorph MR3 capsules 1 dse (issue up to 120), last issued 03/05/12 Morphine sulphate 10mg/5ml qds prn (issue up to 200mls)last issued 11/07/12. This was in addition to regular benzodiazepines and other non controlled analgesia. It was reported that she was visited several times a year by the surgery and kept in contact on the phone. There was no report of any monitoring of her consumption of controlled drugs, but the evidence from the general practice was read. She appeared to continue to draw prescriptions but not consume them as prescribed, thus building up a hoard, and providing the means for a deliberate overdose to be taken. ”

    Source location

    Teresa Lonergan · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026