Recurring concern

Unreliable return-from-hospital arrangements

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 12 Sep 2014•Latest report 15 Apr 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the dedicated return-from-hospital process, including governing forms and protocols, communication with receiving care providers, confirmation of return, post-return evaluation or assessment, and related handover controls needed to resume safe care.

Not included

  • Excludes general hospital discharge planning, discharge summaries, medication transfer or onward-care placement failures when they do not specifically concern the return-from-hospital process.
  • Excludes failures limited to the quality of hospital treatment before return or ongoing care after a reliable return process has been completed.
  • Excludes generic documentation, communication or assessment deficiencies unless they directly impair safe return from hospital.
  • Excludes transport availability or transport safety failures where the concern is conveyance itself rather than safe receipt and follow-up after return.
Reports
8

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
8

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
10

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.

Aden Court Care Home1
Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust1
Care Quality Commission1
Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust1
Health and Safety Executive1
Hibiscus House Domiciliary Care Agency1
Hibiscus Housing Association Limited1
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust1
Maesglas Care Home1
Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust1
NHS England1
Recipient name withheld1
Russells Hall Hospital1
Sunnyside1
Tameside General Hospital1

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. Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin

    AI-generated summary

    Samuel Joseph BROOKES · 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

    Samuel Joseph Brookes was discharged home after a hospital admission following a fall and long lie, but his required care was not rearranged. He was immobile, lived alone, and was left unattended for two weeks without access to his pendant alarm or mobile phone; he was then found unresponsive and deceased. The principal concerns were the failure to arrange and document his care, the lack of a process requiring confirmation of his safe return, and his inability to raise an alarm or call for help.

    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 require notification of safe return to the hospital or care company

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) The transport company were responsible for transportation only and were not required to notify either the hospital, or if known, the care company of Mr Brookes’ safe return. It proceeded on the basis or assumption that care would have restarted within 4 hours or sooner. ”

    Source location

    Samuel Joseph BROOKES · 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

    Some patient transport safety actions fall outside the Trust’s scope.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Some of the actions identified regarding patient transport, fall out of scope of the Trust. These will be taken forward by our Deputy Chief Operating Officer and Head of Site Operations and discussed with relevant integrated care system partners in relation to contractual obligations for ensuring patients discharged home are safe and have access to the agreed methods of communication e.g. mobile telephone, pendant alarm (should they have or require one).”

    Source location

    Response from The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 2025

    Open published response
  2. Black Country

    AI-generated summary

    Charles Evans · 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

    Charles Evans, a resident at Hibiscus House, choked on food in the communal dining room on 29 May 2022, suffered cardiac arrest and severe hypoxic brain injury, and died in hospital the following day. The concerns included inadequate CPR and first-aid provision, absence of a defibrillator and emergency communication arrangements, insufficient staffing and emergency procedures in the dining room, and weaknesses in risk assessment and reporting processes.

    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 further risk assessments after a resident’s return from hospital

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest I heard evidence from Faye Cadogan Registered Manager Hibiscus House and Norma Chambers Catering Assistant at Hibiscus House. 1. None of the Carers employed at Hibiscus House had any training in CPR. The carer on duty was qualified to Level 2 Diploma in Health & Social care which does not include any training in first aid; 2. At the time of the incident there were no staff members trained in CPR (Coroner was told this had been rectified post Mr Evans death); 3. There was no Registered First Aider at the premises; 4. There was no defibrillator on site; 5. There was no requirement for any staff to be on duty in the communal dining room during mealtimes despite the fact the Hibiscus House could cater for residents with special dietary requirements; 6. There was no emergency bell/alarm or telephone in the residents’ dining room. Staff were expected to use their mobile phone to call for help; 7. There was no procedure for what should happen in an emergency situation (in this instance the catering staff member who found Mr Evans located a carer instead of calling 999 themselves; 8. Staff did not know who else was on duty at any given time; 9. There was no proper procedure in place for staff to report concerns about residents; 10. No further risk assessments were being conducted if a resident returned to Hibiscus House after a hospital admission to ensure the facility could still meet the needs of the resident (Coroner was told staff relied on a discharge summary and/or the GP); 11. Post inquest, the Coroner noted the CQC Inspection report for Hibiscus House Domiciliary Care Agency dated July 2019 which rated the facility as ‘requiring improvement’. The Coroner is concerned to establish whether the service provider put forward an action plan following the CQC Inspection setting out what they would do to improve the standards of quality and safety and whether the CQC monitored any progress towards said plan. ”

    Source location

    Charles Evans · 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

    Reassess tenants returning from hospital, including Care Manager risk assessment, ongoing observation and recording outcomes in tenant files and Birdie.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Hibiscus has ensured that new procedures are in place for a reassessment should a tenant attend hospital and subsequently be discharged home. Faye Cadogan advised the Coroner at the inquest that where a tenant had attended hospital previously, the discharge letter was relied upon to inform the staff of any changes in that tenant’s needs.”

    Source location

    Response from Hibiscus House
    Page 5 · response
    Published 4 November 2022

    Open published response
  3. West Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Dilys Greta Etchells · 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

    Dilys Greta Etchells was found after an unwitnessed fall at her nursing home, later diagnosed with fractures of the left tibia and fibula, and subsequently developed pressure ulcers before dying in hospital on 2 July 2021. The report identified concerns about the absence or documentation of fall-prevention measures, delayed medical referral, inadequate care documentation, handover communications, and wound-management procedures.

    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

    Inadequate protocols for return from hospital forms

    Wider context from the report

    “• To review existing protocols governing wound management, completion of admission documentation, care plans, initial wound assessment, body maps, consent to medical treatment form and the return from hospital form. ”

    Source location

    Dilys Greta Etchells · 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

    Train nurses and shift leaders on documentation, care plans, wound management, assessments, body maps, consent forms and hospital-return documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, I provided a training session to all the Registered General Nurses and Shift Leaders at Aden Court on 2 July 2021 (see also below). Part of the session covered expectations around documentation and specifically how staff should complete Hill Care’s standard proforma documentation including; admission documentation, care plans, initial wound assessment, body maps, consent to medical treatment form and return from hospital form. Following the session, all attendees confirmed that they were aware of and understood Hill Care’s policies and procedures in relation to documentation and that they had received training on how documentation must be completed.”

    Source location

    2021-0428-Response-from-HIll-Care-Group_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 December 2021

    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 protocols for wound management and required care documentation are considered sufficient, with compliance monitored through regular audits.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “There are clear protocols in place within Aden Court in relation to wound management, admission documentation, care plans, initial wound assessment, body maps, consent to medical treatment form and the return from hospital form. As outlined above, I provided a training session for all the Registered General Nurses and Shift Leaders on 2 July 2021. The session covered wound management, completion of admission documentation, care plans, initial wound assessment, body maps, consent to medical treatment form and the return from hospital form to ensure that they were aware of the protocols in place within Aden Court. Compliance is monitored through an ongoing, regular and thorough audit process. I have provided more detail below.”

    Source location

    2021-0428-Response-from-HIll-Care-Group_Published
    Page 7 · response
    Published 29 December 2021

    Open published response
  4. West Yorkshire Eastern

    AI-generated summary

    Neil Peter Bastock · 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

    Neil Peter Bastock, who had a history of paranoid schizophrenia and previous suicide attempts and self-harm, died by suicide on 20 September 2021. The report raises concerns about rescinding his detention without family involvement or a formal capacity assessment, inadequate care planning and continuity, failures to respond to warning signs after he became a voluntary patient, and failure to notify police when he left the ward.

    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 evaluate a patient’s situation and required action after return to the ward

    Wider context from the report

    “3. When the section was rescinded, Mr Bastock became a voluntary patient on the ward. In the three days following 17 September 2020, various factors should have triggered a need to reconsider the decision, including: a) Mr Bastock left the ward on occasions and once did not return until 5am. b) On his return, there was no recorded evaluation of his situation and what action was required from the team treating him. c) A family member voiced concern that he was unwell and was not ready to be discharged, yet this warning was not heeded. d) Another family member reported that he had gone to his former partner (whom he had not seen for several years) to give her £250 he had withdrawn from a cash machine for his children. The possibility that this act amounted to a farewell gesture was noted in the nursing record, but its significance was not sufficiently considered. e) Mr Bastock had indicated he felt unable to live alone. Although a social work assessment had taken place, no plan in relation to alternative accommodation had materialised. In the absence of such transition infrastructure, it was premature to consider him for discharge from the section. f) When Mr Bastock left the ward, there was a failure to notify the police of him as a missing person, given his suicide risk (irrespective of whether this complied with the prevailing missing person's policy stipulated timescales). ”

    Source location

    Neil Peter Bastock · 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 return interviews after unauthorised leave and use the information to guide care plans and future leave decisions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The revised procedure will direct staff to ensure that a discussion or return interview will be held with service users upon their return to the ward following a period of unauthorised leave. This information should then inform the service user’s care plan with regards to directing staff what action to take in the event that a service user does not return from leave and future decision making with regards to agreeing leave. The Trust will audit our compliance against this aspect of the procedure in July 2022.”

    Source location

    2021-0365-Response-from-Leeds-and-York-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Published
    Page 7 · response
    Published 4 November 2021

    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 the revised procedure’s return-interview requirements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The revised procedure will direct staff to ensure that a discussion or return interview will be held with service users upon their return to the ward following a period of unauthorised leave. This information should then inform the service user’s care plan with regards to directing staff what action to take in the event that a service user does not return from leave and future decision making with regards to agreeing leave. The Trust will audit our compliance against this aspect of the procedure in July 2022.”

    Source location

    2021-0365-Response-from-Leeds-and-York-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Published
    Page 7 · response
    Published 4 November 2021

    Open published response
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Margaret Ellen Postill · 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

    Margaret Ellen Postill, a resident with dementia at Sunnyside Care Home, fell twice on 2 May 2017 and later developed seizures after a subdural hematoma was identified. She deteriorated over the following weeks, was moved to palliative care, and died on 31 May 2017. Concerns included the lack of evaluation and completed assessment sheets after her return to the care home, and poor-quality documentation at Tameside Hospital concerning the second visit and decision-making.

    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 evaluate patients after return

    Wider context from the report

    “1. There did not appear to have been any evaluation of Mrs Postill after her return on 2nd May 2017. In particular no evaluation/assessment sheets were completed.(Home) ”

    Source location

    Margaret Ellen Postill · 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

    Apply the falls prevention and post-fall protocol, including prompt assessment, incident recording, investigation and review of care plans and risk assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Post Fall Protocol”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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

    Increase Area Director and Quality Regulation Manager scrutiny of falls assessments and evaluations during visits and inspections.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Scrutiny at area level by the Area Directors (AD) has been increased in terms of the quality of the completion of assessment and evaluation through the review of falls as part of their monthly home visit and the Quality Regulation Managers (QRM) on their internal inspection visits.”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 falls trends and share learning through quarterly Quality Governance Group meetings, with follow-up actions reviewed monthly.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Falls and serious incident trends are discussed at the quarterly Quality Governance Group (QGG) and learning is shared across the group. This is the company’s bed to Board governance structure. The frequency of follow up actions from the QGG has increased to a monthly basis, following this incident, to provide clear accountability and mapping of improvements in working to reduce falls and ensure appropriate assessment and evaluation following each fall at individual home and group level.”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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

    Share sample falls risk assessments with staff to clarify assessment and post-fall evaluation requirements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The AD attended the home on the 24 October 2017 to share the findings from the case with the team at the home and the following actions were agreed:”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 a falls flow chart at Sunnyside Care Home to guide post-fall actions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The falls flow chart has been implemented at the home giving clear guidance on what actions to take following a fall within Sunnyside.”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 7 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 24-hour post-incident observation records and senior clinical walk-rounds, with operational and internal inspection audits.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Each accident/incident record has a 24 hour observation record and an additional clinical walk round, which is undertaken by the Deputy / Home Manager to review Residents who are unwell, have fallen, have a peg or catheter etc. to make sure their care needs are effectively met on a daily basis. This is then fed back to the team at the flash meeting where any concerns are identified. This has now been implemented to ensure that the person is checked by a senior person following a fall and this process is audited by the operational team and the internal inspection team.”

    Source location

    2017-0382-Response-by-Tameside-and-Glossop-NHS-Trust
    Page 8 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    Open published response
  6. Avon

    AI-generated summary

    Rebecca Jay ROMERO · 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

    Rebecca Romero died at home on 19 July 2017 after being found with a ligature around her neck, five days after discharge from a psychiatric unit and while under community team care. The report raised concerns about gaps in post-discharge contact and medical review, unclear and inconsistent care planning and risk terminology, communication by text, and arrangements for transferring children between out-of-area and local psychiatric services.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of guidance for managing children returning to their local area after out-of-area psychiatric inpatient care

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) Consideration should be given to reviewing whether there ought to be guidance issued when managing children who go out of area for psychiatric in patient care and further guidance issued in the management of children when returning to their local area when they have been an in-patient of out area. Whether certain steps should be taken to ensure best practice and a consistent approach e.g. risk assessing; face to face meetings; robust care planning; parental involvement; how best to re-integrate back into the local area/team. ”

    Source location

    Rebecca Jay ROMERO · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. Cheshire

    AI-generated summary

    Charles Ray Woodward · 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

    Charles Ray Woodward underwent surgery to remove a sigmoid colon tumour and was discharged home after an apparently uneventful recovery. His health then declined, and he died from peritonitis caused by a leaking anastomosis following surgery. The principal concerns were inadequate communication and liaison between the hospital, community care providers and the family, together with insufficiently robust monitoring of his condition after discharge.

    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

    Inadequate communication and liaison between hospital and community care providers after discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “There was inadequate communication and liaison between the hospital on the one hand and on the other hand the deceased’s GP practice and district nurses in the community who, following the deceased’s discharge from hospital, would be responsible for the deceased’s ongoing care. Further, monitoring of the deceased’s condition from Leighton Hospital was insufficiently robust and relied upon oral contact rather than ensuring the physical presence of a medical attendant, be that attendant hospital or community based. The evidence suggested that there was miscommunication between the hospital and the deceased’s family with the result that the deceased’s worrying decline in health was not appreciated by the hospital. ”

    Source location

    Charles Ray Woodward · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. North Wales (East and Central)

    AI-generated summary

    Sybil 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

    Sybil Roberts fell at her care home on 30 December 2013 and again on 1 February 2014, sustaining a fractured hip on each occasion before dying at Maelor Hospital Wrexham on 15 March 2014. The investigation identified that a further falls risk assessment had not been undertaken, and that her care plan and falls risk had not been reassessed and updated before her return from hospital, after which she sustained her second fracture two days later.

    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 reassess and update care plans and falls risks after hospital return

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the investigation it became apparent that although Mrs Roberts had been assessed upon her admission to the residential home, there had not been a referral to her GP (as would be normal practice at this home) for a further falls risk assessment. This is despite an acknowledgement that her condition was declining prior to the first fall. Furthermore her care plan and falls risk had not been reassessed and updated prior to her return to the home from hospital after the first fall and she sustained her second fracture only two days later. An inadequate assessment of the potential risks Mrs Roberts was made and I feel it is necessary to bring this to your attention due to the fragile and vulnerable nature of other patients cared for at the home for whom an injury in these circumstances could result in death. ”

    Source location

    Sybil Roberts · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026