Epilepsy, 19 Sep 2013 – 19 Jun 2026

Epilepsy-related Prevention of Future Deaths reports

Last 3 years7 Sep 2023 – 7 Sep 2026

Custom range

Based on PFD publication date. Dates are available up to the published snapshot: 7 Sep 2026. Preset periods end on this date.

28All reports 8SUDEP 20Non-SUDEP

Select SUDEP or Non-SUDEP to filter concerns and reports. Counts are PFD reports, not deaths.

About this dataset

We searched all 6,433 reports in the published corpus using a fixed text-search method, then assessed 317 candidates against source-based inclusion criteria. Ninety reports were included. Epilepsy had to be materially relevant to the death or a substantive coroner’s concern; incidental mentions were excluded.

Eligibility and SUDEP assignment were assessed with GPT-5.6 Sol and checked for valid source quotations. Assignment uses a balance-of-probabilities threshold: SUDEP or non-SUDEP must be more likely than not on the report’s evidence. The exact term SUDEP need not appear. Genuinely unclear eligible reports remain in All only. These are model-assisted documentary assessments, not independently validated clinical diagnoses.

The search can miss reports with sparse terminology or incomplete source text. This dataset does not represent all epilepsy deaths. Recurring concerns and responses are taken from the existing published evidence. Published corpus snapshot: 7 September 2026. Cohort selection updated 5 November 2026. The title shows the first and last included reports’ publication dates.

Reports over time

Matching reports published each year within the selected date range.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Matching reports sent to each recipient.

NHS England2
Care Quality Commission1
Department of Health and Social Care1
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust1
The Children's Trust1

Most commonly raised concerns

All classifications 28 reports 7 Sep 2023 – 7 Sep 2026

  1. Unreliable seizure care and managementControls dedicated to recognising, assessing, monitoring, responding to and managing seizures are not reliably provided.3 reportsSelected
  2. Failure to provide required medication promptly when clinically neededThe anchor identifies delayed prescribing of a patient's usual medication after an unexpected admission, while another report identifies delayed prescribing and non-provision of urgent therapeutic medication. These support a recurring concern about timely provision of clinically required medication rather than only the anchor's admission or prescribing-step failure.2 reportsSelected
  3. Failure to reliably learn from medication incidents and implement safeguardsThe medication incident learning process is unreliable: incidents are not consistently followed up or reviewed to identify, communicate and implement safeguards that protect patients from recurrence.2 reportsSelected
  4. Failure to secure and control medicationReports identify medication as remaining accessible, unsecured or inadequately controlled, creating risks of misuse, overdose, theft or access by people other than the intended patient.2 reportsSelected
  5. Inadequate control of illicit substance use and supply in secure institutionsThe anchor identifies an ongoing failure to mitigate illicit substance entry, distribution and use in a secure hospital, while assertions from different reports identify continuing illicit-drug influx, widespread access and weak supply-reduction controls in prisons. These distinct manifestations support a bounded concern about controlling illicit substances in secure institutional settings, rather than only room searches, drug testing or a prison-specific strategy.2 reportsSelected
  6. Inadequate controls on contraband mobile phones in prisonsDifferent reports identify failures in the prison control system for preventing and mitigating access to contraband mobile phones, including their easy availability to prisoners and their use to facilitate drug dealing and other prison-security risks.2 reportsSelected
  7. Inadequate driver licensing controls for road safetyDriver licensing systems do not reliably identify, record, review or restrict drivers whose inexperience, health or vehicle-related risk requires additional safeguards.2 reportsSelected
  8. Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care recordsClinical and care records are incomplete, inaccurate, inconsistent, unavailable or otherwise unreliable for safe care.2 reportsSelected
  9. Unreliable DVLA medical fitness notification arrangementsThe anchor identifies limited professional awareness and uncertain effectiveness of guidance for notifying the DVLA about medically relevant driving risks. A different report identifies clinicians failing to advise patients with cough syncope to stop driving and notify the DVLA, while another identifies failure to notify the DVLA of relevant medical conditions. These support the named DVLA medical-fitness notification process rather than guidance awareness alone.2 reportsSelected
  10. Unreliable communication of critical medication information to GPsRecurring deficiency in the medication-information exchange process between services and GPs, including information needed to maintain supplies, assess prescribing safety and support continuity of treatment.2 reportsSelected
  11. Unreliable hospital discharge processesHospital discharge does not reliably bring together planning, clinical readiness, relevant organisations, safe execution and required follow-up.2 reportsSelected
  12. Unreliable implementation of medication changesReports identify different failures in the medication-change process, including failure to act on a prescribed reduction, failure to ensure carers acknowledge changes, and difficulty implementing specialist-directed changes accurately. Together these support the wider unsafe condition that medication changes are not reliably implemented across prescribing, communication and follow-up controls.2 reportsSelected
  13. Unreliable inter-agency information sharing for coordinated careThe anchor identifies absent agreed communication means and inaccessible shared patient information between mental health agencies. Other canonical reports identify relevant risk information not being shared between agencies and poor inter-agency information sharing preventing coordinated care, supporting a recurring concern with the reliability of inter-agency care information sharing rather than only the anchor's repository or communication-channel failure.2 reportsSelected
  14. Unreliable patient observation arrangementsPatient observation systems do not reliably set, support and deliver the observation level required by assessed safety risk.2 reportsSelected
  15. Unreliable review and action on clinically significant incoming correspondenceReports identify failures across the incoming clinical-correspondence process, including failure to identify GP medication-review requests, failure to bring action-requiring correspondence to medical staff, and correspondence being filed without GP review or action. The shared unsafe condition is that clinically significant correspondence may not reliably reach the responsible clinician or trigger the required clinical response.2 reportsSelected
  16. Unsafe interoperability between prison custody and healthcare proceduresReports identify failures in the bounded interface between prison custody, contracted custody providers and healthcare services, where procedures, responsibilities and safety-relevant information do not operate together reliably.2 reportsSelected
  17. Unsafe medication administrationA recurring failure of the medication-administration system to ensure that medicines are administered safely, accurately, promptly and as prescribed.2 reportsSelected

Reports matching this recurring concern

7 Sep 2023 – 7 Sep 2026 · 2 reports

Classification: all classificationsRecurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
Reset

Only concerns related to the selected recurring concern and their linked actions and positions are shown. Other concerns are counted within each report.

Actions and positions describe what recipients stated in published responses. Select a statement to read its source wording.

  1. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Mia Louise Gauci-Lamport · 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

    Mia Louise Gauci-Lamport, who had treatment-resistant epilepsy and required full-time residential care, was found cyanotic and unresponsive at around 06.32 hours on 11 September 2023 after not being visually checked when a carer entered her room. Resuscitation was unsuccessful. The report raised concerns about inadequate night-time monitoring, incomplete medical records and insufficient clinical oversight and governance.

    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 comprehensive, understandable, accurate and contemporaneous medical records

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Medical Care provided to Mia Mia’s medical records at TCT were neither comprehensive nor easy to understand and did not conform to the expected standard in NHS general or hospital practice to ensure accurate and contemporaneous medical care was being reviewed and documented. Mia was a ‘looked after’ child with complex and challenging health needs and could not contribute or make decisions for herself. The independent investigator found regular PEWS (Paediatric Early Warning Scores) assessments were not undertaken to ensure Mia’s well-being despite it being within her care plan. There was no documented evidence that a multidisciplinary clinical review was regularly, if at all, undertaken to ensure Mia’s risk was regularly assessed, appropriate monitoring was in place, and care provision was meeting her needs. Mia was reviewed by a ‘privately-funded’ consultant employed by but working independently of Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital as and when requested by the medical staff at TCT. The consultant had no terms of reference and did not take responsibility for Mia’s ongoing care and was consulted only in relation to adjustments in her medication for seizure control. Due to financial constraints the consultant’s service level agreement was temporarily terminated and not available from April to October 2023. In this context, Mia was not under a specialist NHS paediatric neuro-consultant to ensure her ongoing medical needs conformed to expected practice nationally and for an independent consultant outside of TCT to have regular oversight and co-ordinate investigations and any further multi-disciplinary management she may need given this progressive life-limiting condition. ”

    Source location

    Mia Louise Gauci-Lamport · 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

    Undertake a comprehensive inspection of the service, including assessment of overnight observations, care planning, clinical monitoring and governance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In December 2023 CQC had received key information and started to plan for an inspection in February. On February 20th to 21st 2024 the CQC undertook a comprehensive inspection of TCT as part of our regulatory response to the notification of Mia’s sad death. The inspection looked at all five key questions of whether TCT is Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. (Please see attached PDF). CQC do not provide ratings for children’s homes that are registered with Ofsted, as per our policy.”

    Source location

    Response from CQC
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 October 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Audit medical records regularly against NHS standards and address ongoing health-record integration issues with system partners.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “○ Medical records: We continually audit our medical records in line with NHS standards and achieve high compliance against these. As an organisation sitting outside the NHS, health record integration is complex and an ongoing area of focus for us with our wider health and social care system partners. Medical record audits continue regularly to ensure our ongoing compliance in this area.”

    Source location

    Response from The Children's Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 14 October 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The Local Authority, not NHS England, is responsible for overseeing the quality of the residential care service because it commissioned the bed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Mia was in a residential care bed, which is commissioned instead by the Local Authority. The commissioning body, in this case the LA, has the responsibility for oversight of the quality of the service. NHSE have provided assurance that their regional team has been working with system and other partners on responding to risks and concerns in a joint approach at this provider, which will be set out in their response. In case of interest, NHSE’s guidance on specialised services can be found here: NHS commissioning » Specialised services.”

    Source location

    Response from DHSC
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 October 2024

    Open published response
  2. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Chloe Anne Tapp · 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

    Chloe Anne Tapp, a 20-year-old with epilepsy and other medical conditions, suffered seizures and respiratory and cardiac arrest on 7 October 2021 and died in hospital on 8 October 2021. The principal concerns included delays transferring her to adult neurology, a telephone consultation despite her being non-verbal, an incorrect and inadequately documented medication tapering regime, and unanswered attempts to obtain clarification. Broader concerns were raised about staffing shortages, unsafe backlogs and difficulties responding to patients and carers within the neurology department.

    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 medication tapering regimes in clinical notes

    Wider context from the report

    “No note was made of the tapering regime for the medication change in Chloe’s notes. ”

    Source location

    Chloe Anne Tapp · 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

    Audit neurology clinic records for record-keeping compliance and conduct quarterly reviews for divisional governance assurance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure adherence to the expected standards we have completed an audit of neurology clinic records during February and March 2024.The results of this audit showed overall good compliance with dictation, headers, footers, and onward referrals. Small deviations that were picked up were fed back to the team and actioned. Audit reviews will continue quarterly to provide assurance to the divisional governance meeting. These are in addition to the Trust wide record keeping audits.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Communicate and reinforce the requirement that medication tapering regimes are recorded in notes and scanned into electronic patient records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is our usual practice to record tapering regimes in patient notes, and this is the expected standard as set out in our clinical record keeping standards policy. The regime was recorded in the letter to Chloe’s GP dated 8 September 2021, however the related table drawn up by the Consultant should have been included in Chloe’s notes.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Conduct a GIRFT review visit to Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust’s neurology department.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Having considered your Report and the concerns raised, a GIRFT visit to Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust has been arranged to review the specific situation within their Neurology department.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Many concerns about Chloe’s care fall within the NHS Foundation Trust’s remit rather than NHS England’s national programme or policy remit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In your Report you raise concerns over pressures being placed on neurology departments and that there was a recognised shortage of neurologists amid an increase in demand. This response focuses on the concerns raised relevant to NHS England national programme or policy. Many of your concerns around the quality of care delivered to Chloe sit within the remit of Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust, and I note that you have also addressed your Report to them.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response

Export data

Your Excel file will include all 2 matching reports.

Classification: all classifications7 Sep 2023 – 7 Sep 2026 (Publication date)Recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
Choose the tabs to include