Recurring concern

Unreliable bowel monitoring and charting

First to latest report 7 May 2015 — 14 Feb 2017

Reports that mention this concern
3
Times this concern has been raised
3
Stated actions linked to this concern
4

What this concern includes

Includes failures to initiate, maintain, complete or update bowel monitoring charts or equivalent bowel-activity records when monitoring is required for patient safety, including the anchor's delayed bowel chart and the separate report's incomplete bowel monitoring chart.

What is not included
  • Excludes diagnosis, treatment or escalation failures for bowel obstruction, constipation or other bowel conditions when bowel monitoring or charting is not itself deficient.
  • Excludes general clinical record-keeping failures that do not specifically concern bowel monitoring or bowel-activity records.
  • Excludes failures to provide laxatives, fluids, nutrition or other treatment where bowel monitoring was completed reliably.
  • Excludes generic patient-observation or physiological-monitoring failures without a specific bowel-monitoring component.

Reports and published responses 3 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Derek LEE · 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

    Derek LEE died on 5 June 2016 following an admission to Brunswick Ward. The report identified numerous concerns about his care, including medication management, incomplete assessments and documentation, falls and pressure-sore prevention, delayed referrals and treatment, nutrition, mobility, and the absence of a care co-ordinator. The inquest concluded that the death was from natural causes, and the report stated that the identified failings did not change the outcome.

    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 a timely bowel chart

    Wider context from the report

    “(6) No bowel chart was kept until the 12th May. Why Why not? Even non nursing, non-medical professionals know that one of the several dangers of Parkinson’s Disease is constipation. ”

    Source location

    Derek LEE · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

  2. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    MR. ANTHONY GEERTS · 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. Anthony Geerts sustained a fractured neck of femur, underwent surgery and was transferred for rehabilitation before being moved to a nursing home. He later returned to hospital with hospital-acquired pneumonia and a possible urinary tract infection, and died on 21 November 2014. The concerns included inadequate rehabilitation, incomplete records and monitoring, poor communication and discharge planning, and failures in managing his continence, fluid restriction and possible chest infection; the inquest concluded that neglect at Princess Royal Hospital contributed to his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to complete bowel monitoring charts

    Wider context from the report

    “Mr. GEERTS went to Princess Royal Hospital to Twineham Ward (the Ward which specialise in Rehabilitation patients coming from The Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton). Mr. GEERTS came with a fractured neck of femur which had been timeously operated. He was determined to return home to his wife who depended on him. He lived in Brighton and Hove and was disappointed to be going to Haywards Heath for rehabilitation as he knew how difficult it would be for his family to visit so regularly. In Brighton he had received physiotherapy and been regularly reviewed. In Haywards Heath he was effectively abandoned from the 6th. His notes give no clue as to how he was cared for. His physiotherapy notes end abruptly with no plan. I was told nurses on this rehabilitation ward had been asked to look after him as (a) There was insufficient physiotherapy staff to do so and (b) Without any or any effective consultation, the decision had been made that he was to be discharged to highgrove Nursing Home as soon as possible after the 6th. Neither Mr. GEERTS nor his family were involved in this decision. Mr. GEERTS had suffered long term mental health issues. These were ignored during his stay at Princess Royal Hospital. His anxieties were not addressed in any meaningful way. He was given no assistance after the 6th. Having been told he was to be transferred for further rehabilitation, Mr. GEERTS remained very anxious about the impending move and about the lack of communication and particularly the lack of physio. For reasons unexplained satisfactorily to this day, he was moved out of Twineham Ward late on the 10th, Bailey Ward was unaware of his needs. He was incontinent of urine. On the 11th he was transferred to the discharge ward from where he contacted his daughter 3 times. He arrived in a poorly state at Highgrove in the mid afternoon. This resulted in him being unable to participate fully in any of the Highgrove activities, nor could he settle in. He was back at The Royal Sussex County Hospital on the 16th with Hospital Acquired Pneumonia and ? urinary tract infection. No more physiotherapy was possible and in spite of ongoing treatment he deteriorated to his death on the 21st. Specifically at Princess Royal Hospital: • Notes not completed. • No nursing notes and no NEWS for 10th or 11th • Fluid chart not completed. Fluid restriction not properly documented. Fluid restriction effectively disregarded. • No plan for physiotherapy • No rehabilitation on Rehabilitation Ward from 6th -10th. Exercise on the 10th not properly documented. • No proper notes of Rationale for transfer to Bailey Ward on 10th/11th. Transfer procedure not followed. Transfer not documented. • No referral of lack of urinary continence. Therefore no plan regarding this. • Failed Trial without catheter on 3rd November 2014. • Bowel monitoring chart not complete • Discharge planning non-existent or inadequate • Communication with patient and family virtually non-existent • No senior review from 4th November 2014; possibility of chest infection not followed up. • Should have had a blood test as requested on 11th November 2014. Did not and therefore unnecessary extra 48 hours on fluid restriction. • Discharge lounge information incorrect. ”

    Source location

    MR. ANTHONY GEERTS · 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

    Introduce integrated documentation for all clinical staff treating patients on Twineham ward.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “b) introduction of integrated documentation for use by all the clinical staff treating each patient on the ward”

    Source location

    2015-0240-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 24 June 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop and deliver a Twineham ward training package on accurate documentation and the consequences of poor documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “c) joint development of a training package for all the staff based on Twineham ward, by the senior physiotherapy and nursing staff, to assist with accurate and detailed documentation. This includes a specific focus on the potential consequences of poor documentation”

    Source location

    2015-0240-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 24 June 2015

    Open published response

  3. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Mrs. Evelyn KENNEDY · 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

    Mrs. Evelyn KENNEDY was an 89-year-old woman who died in hospital on 29 October 2014 after admission following recurrent falls. The inquest concluded that she died of hospital-acquired pneumonia and that her death was probably accelerated by a short time because of the effects of her five-day admission to the Acute Medical Unit. Concerns included incomplete handover and poor personal care, missing identification and risk bands, inadequate monitoring and documentation, missed medication and nutritional support, and failures to escalate clinical 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 record bowel movements

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Once again my concerns involve the Acute Medical Unit (AMU). (2) Mrs. KENNEDY was transferred from AMU in a chair, not a trolley. (3) Handover was incomplete and unhelpful. (4) She arrived unkempt. (5) She had porridge leaking from her mouth; it took 20 mouth sponges to give her adequate mouth care. (6) She felt cold and said she was cold. (7) She had been incontinent of faeces and had not been cleaned for some time. (8) She had no name wrist band. (9) In spite of known allergies she had no allergy wrist band. (10) In spite of falling regularly she had no falls risk wrist band. (11) She still had an IV cannula in place; this should have been removed after 72 hours. (12) Her daily catheter care bundle had not been completed for 3 days. (13) She had no fluid charts for 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th or 20th. (14) Care plans were not completed for 17th, 18th, 19th or 20th. (15) Repositioning charts were incomplete or poor for 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th. (16) The handling assessment was not completed for 16th, 18th, 19th or 20th. (17) No food chart was completed for her entire time in AMU. (18) She had pressure damage to her hips and bottom. (19) No daily oral assessment was completed for her entire time on AMU. (20) She was not weighed. (21) The malnutrition tool was not completed. (22) Her bowel movements were not recorded. (24) NEWS scores of 4 to 9 had not been escalated to doctors nor filled in on her drug chart. PLUS (25) No personal care over the weekend of 18th and 19th. (26) No senior review over that weekend. (27) Not written up for her Sertraline, therefore not given (28) Not written up for any food supplements until 21st October. (29) She should have been specialled, but wasn’t. Once again AMU has been found to be chaotic and not fit for purpose. ”

    Source location

    Mrs. Evelyn KENNEDY · 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

    Monitor documentation more closely and provide nurses with real-time feedback.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Changes, introduced mainly before the inquest into Mrs Kennedy’s sad death as part of the ongoing programme of improvements, include:”

    Source location

    2015-0178-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 May 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review and condense Acute Medical Unit documentation into multidisciplinary paperwork that directs care and reduces duplication.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Extensive and complex work is also being undertaken to”

    Source location

    2015-0178-Response-by-Brighton-and-Sussex-University-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 7 May 2015

    Open published response

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026