Recurring concern

Failure to escalate significant clinical concerns to appropriately senior clinicians

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 23 Aug 2013•Latest report 27 May 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of clinical escalation for significant patient concerns, abnormal findings, changing clinical conditions or treatment problems where escalation to an appropriately senior clinician is required, including obstetric escalation and escalation by junior staff during busy shifts.

Not included

  • Excludes generic organisational governance failures where no clinical concern requiring senior clinical review is identified.
  • Excludes failures of escalation in non-clinical operational, safeguarding, complaints or emergency-control-room processes.
  • Excludes delays in senior review where the failure is solely lack of consultant availability and no escalation deficiency is identified.
  • Excludes failures limited to documentation, communication or training unless they directly constitute or undermine escalation of a significant clinical concern.
Reports
72

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
81

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
103

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 Care6
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust6
NHS England5
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust4
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust3
Royal Sussex County Hospital3
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust3
Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust2
Milton Keynes University Hospital2
Nursing and Midwifery Council2
Recipient name withheld2
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists2
Tameside General Hospital2
Aneurin Bevan University LHB1
Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust1

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. Mid Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Robert Watt · 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

    Robert Watt had suspected bladder cancer symptoms, including haematuria, weight loss and rectal bleeding, but investigations and specialist review did not identify the cancer until it was advanced and incurable. The report identified concerns about communication of a cancelled haematuria clinic appointment, incomplete medical records, reliance on junior doctors for specialist advice, and the lack of urological review when malignancy was suspected.

    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 conduct renal or urological consultations through appropriately senior clinicians

    Wider context from the report

    “iv. On each occasion that he medical team consulted with renal or urological physicians in seeking advice how to manage their patient, the consultation was conducted through the most junior doctor on the ward (FY1) ”

    Source location

    Robert Watt · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  2. West Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Phillip Roy Smith · 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

    Phillip Roy Smith was diagnosed with a likely pancreatic carcinoma and underwent a percutaneous transhepatic cholangiogram with external drain insertion. He deteriorated overnight with severe pain, vomiting and a subsequent cardiac arrest, and died in intensive care on 15 March 2014 after treatment was withdrawn. The concerns included missing nursing and doctors’ records, undocumented observations, medication, blood gas results and fall details, and the junior doctor’s decision not to seek additional senior support despite concerns about Mr. Smith’s deterioration.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to obtain appropriate senior medical review or support when deterioration is identified

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Junior Doctor’s Involvement i) The senior nurse on duty was concerned of Mr. Smith’s deterioration in the early hours of the 15th March. At the time of the junior doctor’s attendance she suggested that a more senior medical review should take place, however the junior doctor indicated that he did not require any further support in the circumstances notwithstanding Mr. Smith’s presentation. ”

    Source location

    Phillip Roy Smith · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report
  3. Black Country

    AI-generated summary

    Kirsty Lisa Pritchard · 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

    Kirsty Lisa Pritchard had complex medical needs and a history of self-harm and suicidal ideation. After being discharged from hospital, she contacted the community team several times reporting thoughts of self-harm and suicide; she was later found deceased at home, hanging with a belt around her neck, and was pronounced deceased at 14:15 on 20 January 2013. The report raised concerns about delayed communication of worsening symptoms and risk to the responsible consultant, and deficiencies in systems for contacting and locating her after an immediate risk was reported.

    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 ensure that the responsible consultant is made aware of worsening symptoms after discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) I am concerned that the ability to undertake effective management of patient risks of self harm and suicide ideation upon discharge may be compromised if the Consultant in charge or equivalent is not made aware of worsening symptoms and that effective systems are not in place to action this. ”

    Source location

    Kirsty Lisa Pritchard · 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

    Recirculate the medical escalation flow chart to CHITT and inpatient staff to clarify escalation routes for risk concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The communication with consultants to raise any concerns has been reinforced by recirculating the medical escalation flow chart (Appendix 1) to all CHITT and inpatient staff both clinical and non-clinical so that it is clear which individual any concerns about risk should be raised with.”

    Source location

    2014-0565-Response-by-Black-County-NHS-Trust_Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 17 October 2014

    Open published response
  4. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    MARTIN ARNOLD HILL · 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

    MARTIN ARNOLD HILL arrived at A & E on 28 March 2014 after approximately three days of confusion, abdominal pain and vomiting, with raised inflammatory markers. The concerns included delayed antibiotics, failures to refer him to the Critical Care Outreach Team when his NEWS was elevated, inadequate withdrawal treatment, failures in managing constipation, poor handover and communication, and serious omissions in the Medical Administration Record.

    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 refer patients to the Critical Care Outreach Team at required NEWS thresholds

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) At 20:00 hours on the 28th March 2014 after he had been admitted to The Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton his NEWS rose from 1 to 6. NEWS’ own Guidance and the Hospital’s Protocol require that Mr. HILL should have been referred to the Critical Care Outreach Team. He was not. His NEWS rose to 6 again on the 30th March 2014 at 00:20 hours. However, he was not referred then either. He was not referred to Critical Care Outreach until his NEWS rose to 10 at 07:00 hours on the 30th March 2014. ”

    Source location

    MARTIN ARNOLD HILL · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  5. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Miss Abiola Dosunmu · 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

    Abiola Dosunmu developed abnormal blood tests, proteinuria and symptoms that were treated as cellulitis, before rapidly deteriorating and being found dead at home on 24 August 2012. The report identified concerns about failures to communicate the proteinuria and abnormal results, inadequate follow-up and monitoring, and a missed opportunity to diagnose and treat SLE earlier.

    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 inform the consultant of the patient and imminent self-discharge before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) Before discharge neither the patient nor the imminent self discharge were not known to the consultant, who would have wished to be informed and would have sought further investigations and communications. ”

    Source location

    Miss Abiola Dosunmu · 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

    Notify consultants within 12 hours when their patient self-discharges from hospital.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The medical records (in particular the clinical noted dated 09.03.12 at 13.25 hours) suggest that the Trust communicated the significance of Abiola’s illness as it was understood at the time and did its best to dissuade her from leaving hospital. The Trust is satisfied that it acted appropriately by warning Abiola and her mother of the serious consequences of self-discharging. Nonetheless, with immediate effect consultants will be notified within 12 hours that their patient has discharged themselves from hospital to minimise the potential risk to the patient or others (see also paragraph 5 below).”

    Source location

    2014-0209-Response-by-Kings-College-Hospital
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 May 2014

    Open published response
  6. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Herta Edith Maria WOODS · 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

    Herta Edith Maria WOODS, a 94-year-old woman living alone with carer support, was found after falls at home and admitted to hospital with injuries, dehydration, rhabdomyolysis and renal impairment. She was found deceased in her hospital bed early on 8 August 2013 after being overloaded with fluid. The principal concerns included apparent abandonment in the Acute Medical Unit, inadequate documentation and fluid monitoring, failure to act on the NEWS score, failure to obtain timely senior review, and failure to replace an inappropriate cannula.

    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 seek early senior review

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) The failure to seek an early Senior Review for the failure to record the Fluid Chart correctly - this is important because it was fluid overload that was the immediate cause of Mrs. Wood's death. ”

    Source location

    Herta Edith Maria WOODS · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Barbara White · 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

    Barbara White presented to Tameside Hospital with symptoms consistent with biliary colic, deteriorated after 9 December 2012, and died on 2 January 2013 despite intensive care intervention. Concerns included a 12-hour lack of clinical and nursing observations, an incorrectly recorded PARS score, staff shortages and inadequate escalation, and insufficient handover information about outstanding investigations.

    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 escalate to a consultant

    Wider context from the report

    “4. There was a lack of information in the patient’s medical records following the handover from the day staff to the night staff. Following the review of Mrs White on the 9th December when further tests had been requested there was a lack of any further clinical consideration and no escalation to a consultant. At the Inquest I heard evidence from Dr ████████ who was the SHO on duty during the night and who had received the handover from the day staff. Her evidence was that she had no recollection of Mrs White being mentioned at the handover and was unaware that there were outstanding investigations. ”

    Source location

    Barbara White · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. Berkshire

    AI-generated summary

    Edna Elsie Mary Eden · 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

    Edna Elsie Mary Eden, who had been living independently, was admitted to hospital after feeling unwell and reporting recent right-sided chest pain. She remained in A&E and the AMU for approximately fourteen and a half hours before being seen by a doctor, then arrested and could not be revived. The report identified missed opportunities involving delayed medical review, failure to recognise or escalate abnormal findings, inadequate communication, incorrect observation scoring, and lack of antibiotic cover.

    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 escalate unresolved clinical review access problems to senior staff

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Nursing staff were not able to make contact with Doctors to review Mrs Eden. When this continued, the problem was not escalated to more senior staff. ”

    Source location

    Edna Elsie Mary Eden · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of junior staff to escalate clinical concerns to senior staff

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) Junior staff on a very busy shift appeared reluctant, or ignorant of the procedures, to escalate concerns to more senior staff to address a significant backlog that had developed. ”

    Source location

    Edna Elsie Mary Eden · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to calculate EDD scores accurately and trigger required Doctor review

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The nursing observation chart suggested infrequent observations for a patient who had not yet been clerked by a Doctor. The EDD score was wrongly calculated which meant an escalation of Doctor review was not carried out. ”

    Source location

    Edna Elsie Mary Eden · 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

    Establish a 24-hour Central Hub with patient tracking, referral and bleep management, workload oversight, handover, task allocation, escalation and senior-manager staffing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust has plans to introduce a 24 hours a day Central Hub system and the timescales for actions are stated in the enclosed action plan. It is envisaged the Hub will be located at Wexham Park Hospital and be equipped with IT systems and run by senior managers who will be responsible for ensuring the following:”

    Source location

    2013-0317-Response-by-Heatherwood-Wexham-Park-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 22 February 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

    Implement policy requiring independent verification of deteriorating-adult EDOD score calculations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, in addition I wanted to specifically point out that a new Policy i.e. TPP 231 (enclosed) which focuses on the Management of the Deteriorating Adult Patient was introduced in August 2013. This Policy has introduced a new requirement for ensuring that the EDOD score calculation is verified by another member of staff to reduce inaccuracies as was in this case. An audit capturing the number of correctly calculated EDOD scores was carried out in July 2013 and the results of this audit highlighted very good compliance; with all standards exceeding the 90% mark and as well as showing that every patient with an increased EDOD score had the algorithm followed appropriately.”

    Source location

    2013-0317-Response-by-Heatherwood-Wexham-Park-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 22 February 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

    Audit compliance with accurate EDOD score calculation and appropriate algorithm use.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, in addition I wanted to specifically point out that a new Policy i.e. TPP 231 (enclosed) which focuses on the Management of the Deteriorating Adult Patient was introduced in August 2013. This Policy has introduced a new requirement for ensuring that the EDOD score calculation is verified by another member of staff to reduce inaccuracies as was in this case. An audit capturing the number of correctly calculated EDOD scores was carried out in July 2013 and the results of this audit highlighted very good compliance; with all standards exceeding the 90% mark and as well as showing that every patient with an increased EDOD score had the algorithm followed appropriately.”

    Source location

    2013-0317-Response-by-Heatherwood-Wexham-Park-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 22 February 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

    Introduce electronic MSS calculation of EDOD scores in the Emergency Department.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The new MSS system was introduced in the Emergency Department on 14 January 2014 and has an added function of calculating the EDOD score electronically thereby reducing the possibility of wrong calculations.”

    Source location

    2013-0317-Response-by-Heatherwood-Wexham-Park-Hospital-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 22 February 2014

    Open published response
  9. Manchester City

    AI-generated summary

    Anthony Bernard McCormick · 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

    Anthony Bernard McCormick was admitted to hospital with gastrointestinal symptoms, vomiting, lethargy, fever and rigors, and was later found to have liver abscesses and gallstones. He underwent surgery but developed pneumonia and sepsis and died on 31 May 2011; the post-mortem found extensive empyema and sepsis. Concerns included delays in urgent admission, diagnosis, specialist referral and surgery, failures in communication and clinical review, and gaps in appropriate antibiotic treatment.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of senior clinical review to recognise seriousness and plan urgent treatment

    Wider context from the report

    “1. When the results of the blood tests taken at Macclesfield Hospital on 27 January 2011 were received this should have resulted in an urgent admission to hospital and further investigations undertaken to establish the source of the symptoms. This did not happen and suggests failures in communication and senior clinical review and appreciation of the significance of the presenting symptoms. 2. There was a significant failure to appreciate the seriousness of the condition, the need for urgent treatment and associated raised mortality risks upon the receipt of the results of the CT scan on 28 February 2011 showing the presence of multiple liver abscesses and gallstones. These are all factors which it would be reasonable to expect senior clinicians to appreciate and plan accordingly. ”

    Source location

    Anthony Bernard McCormick · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Jude Augustus Gordon · 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

    Jude Augustus Gordon underwent surgery and anaesthesia on 23 November 2011, deteriorated with signs of respiratory failure on 27 November, and died shortly after suffering a cardiac arrest. The concerns included failure to escalate his treatment or refer him to critical care, miscalculation of the Early Warning Score, variation in how scores were calculated between Trusts, and the absence of an automatic alert system for senior clinicians.

    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 contact a consultant when Early Warning Scores indicate clinical deterioration

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Evidence was given at the inquest, by a consultant, that if he had been called to see Mr Gordon at the time his condition deteriorated, as was indicated by the Early Warning Score system should have happened, then he would have referred to critical care. He was not contacted. I was informed at the inquest that a Trust in Birmingham has a computerised system, that leads to an automatic alert to the relevant senior doctor on each occasion that a Early Warning Score exceeds the relevant level, for contact to be required. Such a system would on the 27th November 2011, to the consultant attending on Mr Gordon. ”

    Source location

    Jude Augustus Gordon · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to refer patients to consultant level when Early Warning Scores indicate escalation

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) As stated the Early Warning Score in Sheffield is referred to as SHEWS. It was clear from the evidence that for a period of almost four and a half hours, prior to his final collapse, Mr Gordon’s score had shown a marked increase. This in itself should have led to referral to consultant level which did not happen. It was also apparent that there had been a miscalculation of the Early Warning Score, by more than one individual. The court was informed, by expert evidence, that there are differences in the method of calculating an Early Warning Score, between different Trusts. Nursing staff, but in particular junior doctors, who are often the person to make the decision to increase the level of treatment, have either trained or worked in different Trusts. This may lead to confusion. It was not clear to me why there is not a single, National, Early Warning Score system. ”

    Source location

    Jude Augustus Gordon · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026