Recurring concern

Unreliable root cause analysis processes

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 3 Dec 2013•Latest report 14 May 2024

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the dedicated root cause analysis process, including initiation, investigator competence and training, evidence and stakeholder input, critical analysis, identification of lessons, action planning, completion and confirmation of resulting actions.

Not included

  • Excludes generic incident investigation or organisational-learning failures where root cause analysis is not the specifically identified process.
  • Excludes failures in implementing safety actions where no root cause analysis or root cause analysis action plan is involved.
  • Excludes generic clinician training deficiencies unrelated to undertaking root cause analysis.
  • Excludes deficiencies in the underlying clinical or operational process investigated when the root cause analysis process itself is not unsafe.
Reports
26

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
27

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2024

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
56

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.

NHS England3
Royal Stoke University Hospital3
Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Local Health Board2
Department of Health and Social Care2
Devon Partnership NHS Trust2
Enteral (GB) UK2
International Organization for Standardization2
Nursing Times2
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust2
Axminster Medical Practice1
Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust1
Care UK1
Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust1
Derriford Hospital1
Dudley Integrated Health and Care 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. East Sussex

    AI-generated summary

    Carol Ann DIVALL · 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

    Carol Ann DIVALL had Alzheimer's disease and sustained a hip fracture at home on 15 September 2022, which was surgically repaired during a hospital admission. She was discharged on 24 October 2022 for end-of-life care and died at home on 29 October 2022. Concerns included severe oral thrush and malnutrition, limited mobilisation, development and deterioration of a grade 4 sacral pressure sore, and misleading or incomplete discharge documentation and investigation.

    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 a sufficient and comprehensive root cause analysis

    Wider context from the report

    “E. The RCA was insufficient and did not address all of the issues surrounding Mrs Divall's care nor did it properly address those issues it did consider. ”

    Source location

    Carol Ann DIVALL · 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

    Develop and use a pressure-ulcer After Action Review template under the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Under the NHS England’s Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF) the Trust have developed a Pressure Ulcer After Action Review (AAR) template in collaboration with the TVN's and the Pure Ulcer Review Group (PURG) – see Attachment F. The aim of PSIRF is to apply a broader approach to addressing patient safety issues, such as pressure ulcers, taking the focus away from investigating individual incidents to instead focus on”

    Source location

    Response from East Sussex Healthcare
    Page 4 · response
    Published 15 May 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 RCA was specifically scoped to pressure ulcers, so it did not address other care concerns that were not identified during admission.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “E. The RCA was insufficient and did not address all of the issues surrounding Mrs Divall's care nor did it properly address those issues it did consider.”

    Source location

    Response from East Sussex Healthcare
    Page 4 · response
    Published 15 May 2024

    Open published response
  2. Warwickshire

    AI-generated summary

    David RILEY · 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

    David Riley developed a pericardial effusion after atrial fibrillation ablation and later suffered a stroke before dying on 10 June 2023. Concerns included inconsistent decisions about pausing Apixaban, delays in restarting it, inadequate communication and continuity of care, and difficulties using computerised clinical records.

    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 specify and disseminate learning from the DOAC pausing incident

    Wider context from the report

    “Although the Warwick hospital conducted a Root Cause Analysis Investigation Report (RCAIR) of 6 July 2023 which indicated that the pausing of the DOAC was a lesson learned, it did not indicate what was learned. The only further action was limited to the incident being presented at the Grand Round, but this had not taken place at the time of the inquest, some 9 months after publication of the RCAIR. There are remaining outstanding matters of concern. ”

    Source location

    David RILEY · 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

    Review the Report and consider whether learning should be shared across Midlands integrated care boards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Regional Chief Pharmacist in the Midlands has also been asked to review your Report and consider whether any learnings need to be shared across the ICBs within the Midlands region.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 August 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

    Discuss received Prevention of Future Deaths reports through the Regulation 28 Working Group and share their learning nationally and regionally.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I would also like to provide further assurances on the national NHS England work taking place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are discussed by the Regulation 28 Working Group, comprising Regional Medical Directors and other clinical and quality colleagues from across the regions. This ensures that key learnings and insights around events, such as the sad death of David, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us to pay close attention to any emerging trends that may require further review and action.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 August 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

    Share the report with Agilio Software for awareness.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will share your report with Agilio Software for their awareness.”

    Source location

    Response from NICE
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 August 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

    Present the incident and related learning at the cardiology Grand Round.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I can only apologise that, over a year after his death, Mr Riley’s case has still not been presented at the Trust’s Grand Round. His case will be presented by one of our Cardiology consultants to Grand Round on 19 July – and will incorporate the learning from the concerns you have raised in your Regulation 28 report.”

    Source location

    Response from S. Warwickshire NHS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 August 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

    Prioritise Grand Round slots for cases whose formal investigations recommend presentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Grand Round is an “open to all staff” learning forum – held weekly both in person and online – and there are always a large number topics vying for attention. This, combined with staff availability, means that there can sometimes be a significant time lag between an incident occurring and the learning being shared. That said, the delay in this particular instance is unacceptable, and we have asked our Medical Education Co-ordinator (who manages the programme) to ensure that priority slots are given to those cases where a formal investigation recommends that a case be discussed at Grand Round.”

    Source location

    Response from S. Warwickshire NHS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 August 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

    Operational responsibility for delivering health services and responding to related concerns lies with NHS England.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England is operationally responsible for delivering health services across the country and will be responding directly to your concerns at length. NHS England is an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department of Health and Social Care.”

    Source location

    Response from DHSC
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 August 2024

    Open published response
  3. Birmingham and Solihull

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas Peter LOXTON · 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

    Thomas Peter LOXTON was found unresponsive at home on 21 September 2023 and was subsequently declared deceased. The post-mortem examination determined that his death was due to an overdose of multiple prescription medications, and the inquest concluded suicide. Concerns included administrative errors that led to clinicians sending contact letters to his family after his death, insufficient collaborative working between two mental health trusts, and outstanding actions intended to reduce 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

    Failure to complete BCH Root Cause Analysis recommendations within their target timeframes

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence on behalf of Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (BCH) was that there are numerous recommendations as detailed in its Root Cause Analysis (RCA) report that remain outstanding that have target completion dates that arise after the conclusion of this inquest. These dates have been pushed back once already. I am concerned that if these targets are pushed back further and/or are not met, for whatever reason, there is a risk that future deaths will occur. Upon conclusion of the inquest, I am Functus Officio, with no power to request updates from the Trust to check and ensure that the targets have been met and changes have been made. Whilst I am grateful for the efforts of reassurance provided by representatives of the Trust at the inquest, I am reluctant to dismiss my concerns, particularly where actions remain outstanding, and I have opportunity to take action now to ensure that the risk of future deaths is reduced. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Peter LOXTON · 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

    Continue working with community services to embed action-plan changes and monitor their impact.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have enclosed alongside this letter a copy of the action plan presented to you during inquest on the 15th February 2024. This update provides further insight into the completion of all areas of learning identified as a result of our investigation. Where applicable we have referenced the assurance processes”

    Source location

    Response from Black Country Healthcare
    Page 1 · response
    Published 22 February 2024

    Open published response
  4. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Ronald Scott Ashdown · 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

    Ronald Scott Ashdown died from aspiration pneumonia on 15 August 2021, following severe disability caused by a hypoxic brain injury after a cardiac arrest in 2013. Concerns included failures in basic personal hygiene while he was dependent on hospital staff, and a flawed investigation that failed to consider photographic evidence and contributed to subsequent safeguarding investigations being undermined.

    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 provide critical primary evidence for root cause analysis

    Wider context from the report

    “(a) The extent of the Trust’s inexplicable failure to provide critical primary evidence for the purposes of the RCA led directly to an erroneously exculpatory RCA Report; without an accurate and reliable RCA the lessons upon which important changes to Trust systems and practice depend cannot be identified and acted upon in a timely fashion; ”

    Source location

    Ronald Scott Ashdown · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Safeguarding investigations undermined by misleading root cause analysis

    Wider context from the report

    “(d) Finally, the evidence confirmed that the misleading failures in the Trust’s RCA fed into and undermined the subsequent Thurrock Local Authority Safeguarding Adult Review Investigation and a wider systemic section 42 Safeguarding investigation, both of which will now require review with the concomitant delay involved. ”

    Source location

    Ronald Scott Ashdown · 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

    Implement an amended safeguarding policy covering section 42 enquiries, inter-organisational information sharing, Datix evidence uploads, and Executive Assurance Group review of recommendations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In our letter of 21 June 2023, we confirmed we were in the process of re-drafting our safeguarding policy. Attached to this letter is the amended policy which now has clear guidance on the management of section 42 safeguarding enquiries and how information should be shared between organisations. The policy makes clear that all evidence received by the Trust from external sources, including photographs, should be uploaded to Datix, our shared management software. The risk of omitting salient information for our investigations is inherently reduced.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 July 2023

    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

    Continue strengthening safeguarding governance and information sharing with external stakeholders, including consideration of all documentation in internal investigations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I am confident we are doing all we can to meet the personal care needs of our patients, and that we have systems and processes in place to monitor compliance with this standard. We will continue to strengthen our governance in relation to safeguarding practices and information sharing with external stakeholders; ensuring that all documentation is considered when completing our internal investigations.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 July 2023

    Open published response
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Derek Holmes · 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 Holmes, who had advanced metastatic prostate cancer and congestive cardiac failure, was admitted to hospital with several acute problems and fell while attempting to get out of bed. He sustained a left hip fracture requiring surgery and died after developing vomiting and signs of a chest infection. Concerns included errors in the Trust’s Root Cause Analysis, inadequate formal examination of issues including patient call-bells and delays in obtaining specialist advice, and the grading of the fall’s harm.

    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 formal investigation learning to address the breadth of identified patient safety issues

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Notwithstanding the fact that the document had passed through the Trust’s quality assurance process, it is a matter of concern that the Root Cause Analysis investigation into the circumstances of Mr Holmes’s fall contained a number of basic and obvious errors. Prompt, rigorous and effective investigations of clinical incidents are essential to deriving learning and improving patient safety, thereby reducing the risk of future deaths; 2. The formal learning derived from the Trust’s investigation (in the form of an Action Plan to the Root Cause Analysis) does not appear to take into account the breadth of issues raised by the case and which were apparent to the Trust from complaints correspondence and statements obtained from staff in advance of the inquest. As such, the Trust does not appear to have taken the opportunity to formally examine and critically analyse key issues such as: • the adequacy of existing processes designed to ensure patient call-bells are working at all times; and • why a delay has occurred in obtaining advice from a specialist hospital in the present case and whether the processes by which such advice is obtained are fit for purpose. 3. Connected with the above, the Trust does not appear to have revisited the grading of “moderate” harm originally assigned to Mr Holmes’s fall on the Acute Medical Unit notwithstanding his death being reported to the Coroner on the basis there was reason to suspect it contributed to his death. The court heard evidence to the effect that this grading informs the nature and extent of investigation which arises from a patient safety incident (thus impacting upon the learning which can be derived from such an incident). ”

    Source location

    Derek Holmes · 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 update the incident reporting and incident and complaints investigation policy in alignment with the NHS England Patient Safety Framework.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Prior to the inquest of Mr Holmes, I had instructed a review of the Trust’s Incident Reporting and Incident and Complaints Investigation Policy. This was in the context of Patient Safety 2, as information and resources become available to inform the Trust approach. The learning from this inquest has further informed the quality assurance process. The review and update to the Policy has been undertaken by the Head of Investigations, Learning and Audit and Head of Nursing for Professional Standards and Assurance, overseen by the Assistant Director of Integrated Governance.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 3 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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

    Disseminate organisational learning on investigation methodology and responding to people who raise concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The policy builds of the principles of good compliant handling that have been recommended by the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman. This includes the Trust’s approach to managing the complaints, responding to complainants and keeping people informed about the concerns that they raise. As part of this approach, learning will be disseminated across the organisation regarding the required methodology and how we respond and support people when they raise concerns. Ongoing monitoring of the policy will take place through local audits of informal concerns and formal investigations. This will support the completion of other investigations such as root cause analysis and use the same principles so that these can be communicated across the organisation, alongside learning from investigations.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 3 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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 bimonthly oversight meetings to triangulate inquests with related investigatory processes and identify status changes or delays.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust has also introduced a bimonthly oversight meeting for triangulation of scheduled and new inquests with existing or newly instructed investigatory processes, with Head of Investigations, Audit and Learning, Head of Assurance, Compliance and Governance, Head of Nursing for Professional Standards and Assurance and Legal Services Manager, chaired by the Assistant Director of Integrated Governance. This process has sought to ensure the improved triangulation of current investigations and support early identification of any changes in status to the patient (such as their death) or delays in conclusion. Patient tracking list methodology will be used to inform this process and ensure that there is oversight of all learning activity associated with investigations and inquests.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 4 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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 a cohesive clinical review process for incident investigations, inquest statements and learning-from-deaths reviews before inquests.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The development of a clinical review process is ongoing at the time of preparing this response to ensure that all incident investigations, inquest statements and reviews undertaken as part of our learning from deaths process are assessed and considered cohesively before an inquest. This aims to ensure consistency across all streams of investigation and learning and will help provide an additional clinical check to ensure that any potential discrepancies are responded to, enhancing our approach to learning.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 5 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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 the Ulysses Safeguard improvement project to standardise use and increase reporting functionality.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust are currently undertaking a comprehensive improvement project focused upon the Ulysses Safeguard system, which is the electronic risk management system used by the Trust. It is a system which allows for web-based reporting of incidents and safeguarding concerns, alongside system based operational management of complaints, incidents, claims, inquests, safeguarding and risk. It is also a platform which has the facility to recognise and acknowledge good professional practice known as ‘Excellence reporting’. The improvement project aims to increase utility of this system, with standardisation of use and increased reporting functionality.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 5 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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 strengthened inquest triage with seven-day clinical review, investigation review, communication and delay monitoring.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To provide an additional safety net in this process, the Trust has also taken steps to amend and improve the triage system for newly listed inquests. In the context of the recent letter HM Senior Coroner received from Mr Richard Jolly of Weightmans LLP, in relation to the provision of our inhouse legal team, processes have been reinvigorated to ensure triage, review and instruction sent out to clinicians within seven days of the initial inquest request.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 7 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    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

    Add a full-time clinical staff member to support the strengthened inquest triage and review process.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the new process, a clinical review of the case and a review of any previous investigations is also performed at the outset where we are able, in order to identify any linked actions. This process would allow for the revisiting of levels of harm for individual incidents to ensure that this is appropriate, with advice from the specialist teams. There is also the addition of a full time clinical member of staff to support this process moving forward, and a more rigorous review system to capture potential delays. The Trust has started to implement this process ensuring communication is maintained with HM Coroner throughout.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care
    Page 7 · response
    Published 22 September 2022

    Open published response
  6. Manchester North

    AI-generated summary

    Mohammed Abdus Salem · 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

    Mohammed Abdus Salem, who had chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia, was admitted to hospital after his condition deteriorated and died after being found unresponsive on 1 April 2021. A further intended dose of Rasburicase was not administered on 1 April despite high urate levels; it was considered more likely than not that giving it would have prolonged his life by up to 48 hours. The Root Cause Analysis did not examine the factors behind the omitted dose or its consequences, raising concerns about the rigour of the review and organisational learning from the 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

    Insufficient rigour in root cause analyses

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The Root Cause Analysis (RCA) undertaken by the Northern Care Alliance identified that a dose of Rasburicase had not been administered on 1 April 2021 however it did not consider any of the factors that gave rise to that omission or its consequences. My concern is that the RCA fell short of the required standard of rigour which leaves residual questions as to organisational governance standards and learning from death. ”

    Source location

    Mohammed Abdus Salem · 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

    Make pharmacy input mandatory in root-cause analyses whenever medication issues are identified, ensuring objective and expert review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Issue: The need to ensuring robust address of any medication issues in all RCAs.”

    Source location

    2021-0348-Response-from-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 October 2021

    Open published response
  7. Stoke-on-Trent and North Staffordshire

    AI-generated summary

    Stephen James Oakes · 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

    Stephen James Oakes, aged 59, died in hospital on 23 December 2017 after a carefeed 14F nasogastric tube inadequately drained stomach contents, allowing vomit to pass the tube and leading to aspiration pneumonia in the context of metastatic bronchial carcinoma and small bowel obstruction. The principal concerns included inadequate product description and staff training, insufficient hospital evaluation of the tube, failure to recognise inadequate drainage or consider alternatives, and possible wider product-labelling problems.

    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 compulsory root cause analysis training for clinicians

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) There is no compulsory training of clinicians required to undertake root cause analysis. ”

    Source location

    Stephen James Oakes · 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

    Continue providing root cause analysis training for clinicians across the organisation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust continue to provide RCA training for clinicians across the organisation. Whilst training was available prior to the inquest touching the deaths of Mr Hussey and Mr Oakes, we aim to increase the number of staff who are trained in the basic principles and tools for RCA investigations. All names of staff who have undergone RCA training will be entered onto a staff database and future Investigating Officers will be selected from this list.”

    Source location

    Response-from-Royal-Stoke-University-Hospital_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Record all staff who complete root cause analysis training in a staff database and select future investigating officers from that list.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust continue to provide RCA training for clinicians across the organisation. Whilst training was available prior to the inquest touching the deaths of Mr Hussey and Mr Oakes, we aim to increase the number of staff who are trained in the basic principles and tools for RCA investigations. All names of staff who have undergone RCA training will be entered onto a staff database and future Investigating Officers will be selected from this list.”

    Source location

    Response-from-Royal-Stoke-University-Hospital_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Work with HSIB to test and introduce national patient safety incident investigation training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Recognising that there are well identified and publicised issues with the quality of patient safety investigations in the NHS, there is ongoing work, as part of the NHS Patient Safety Strategy, to pilot a new framework for incident response: the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF). This framework focuses on the importance of conducting a systems-based patient safety incident investigation. Much like the Serious Incident Framework, the PSIRF, and the Patient Safety Incident Investigation Standards which sit alongside it, require investigators to be appropriately trained.”

    Source location

    2021-0114-Response-from-NHS-England-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Develop a procurement framework enabling providers and commissioners to access quality-assured patient safety incident investigation training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England and NHS Improvement are working with the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB), who are testing and introducing national patient safety incident investigation training. In addition, a patient safety incident investigation training procurement framework is also being developed to support healthcare providers and commissioners to access quality assured investigation training.”

    Source location

    2021-0114-Response-from-NHS-England-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    NHS England and Improvement is responsible for responding to concerns about Hospital Trust evaluation, nursing practice, and root-cause-analysis training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We understand from NHS England and Improvement that a separate response has been provided to yourself covering points 3, 4 and 5.”

    Source location

    2021-0114-Response-from-MHRA_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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 NHS investigation requirements already require systems-based investigations conducted by appropriately trained investigators, addressing the concern about compulsory root-cause-analysis training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In relation to concern 5, around Root Cause Analysis training, it is important to note that all NHS trusts are required to comply with the Serious Incident Framework (2015) when conducting patient safety incident investigations into incidents such as the tragic events described. The Framework states that;”

    Source location

    2021-0114-Response-from-NHS-England-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 2021

    Open published response
  8. Stoke-on-Trent and North Staffordshire

    AI-generated summary

    Peter John Hussey · 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

    Peter John Hussey died after post-surgical complications following reversal of an ileostomy. A carefeed 14F nasogastric tube inadequately drained his stomach, allowing vomiting and contributing to aspiration pneumonia. Concerns included insufficient product description and staff training, inadequate evaluation of the tube, and failure to recognise poor drainage and consider alternative treatment or escalation.

    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 compulsory root cause analysis training for clinicians

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) There is no compulsory training of clinicians required to undertake root cause analysis. ”

    Source location

    Peter John Hussey · 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

    Continue providing root cause analysis training for clinicians across the organisation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust continue to provide RCA training for clinicians across the organisation. Whilst training was available prior to the inquest touching the deaths of Mr Hussey and Mr Oakes, we aim to increase the number of staff who are trained in the basic principles and tools for RCA investigations. All names of staff who have undergone RCA training will be entered onto a staff database and future Investigating Officers will be selected from this list.”

    Source location

    Response-from-Royal-Stoke-University-Hospital_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Record all staff who complete root cause analysis training in a staff database and select future investigating officers from that list.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust continue to provide RCA training for clinicians across the organisation. Whilst training was available prior to the inquest touching the deaths of Mr Hussey and Mr Oakes, we aim to increase the number of staff who are trained in the basic principles and tools for RCA investigations. All names of staff who have undergone RCA training will be entered onto a staff database and future Investigating Officers will be selected from this list.”

    Source location

    Response-from-Royal-Stoke-University-Hospital_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Pilot the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework to improve systems-based patient safety incident investigations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Recognising that there are well identified and publicised issues with the quality of patient safety investigations in the NHS, there is ongoing work, as part of the NHS Patient Safety Strategy, to pilot a new framework for incident response: the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF). This framework focuses on the importance of conducting a system-based patient safety incident investigation. Much like the Serious Incident Framework, the PSIRF, and the Patient Safety Incident Investigation Standards which sit alongside it, require investigators to be appropriately trained.”

    Source location

    2021-0115-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Work with the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch to test and introduce national patient safety incident investigation training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England and NHS Improvement are working with the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB) who are testing and introducing national patient safety incident investigation training. In addition, a patient safety incident investigation training procurement framework is also being developed to support healthcare providers and commissioners to access quality assured investigation training.”

    Source location

    2021-0115-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Develop a procurement framework enabling healthcare providers and commissioners to access quality-assured patient safety incident investigation training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England and NHS Improvement are working with the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB) who are testing and introducing national patient safety incident investigation training. In addition, a patient safety incident investigation training procurement framework is also being developed to support healthcare providers and commissioners to access quality assured investigation training.”

    Source location

    2021-0115-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 April 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

    Concerns about hospital tube evaluation, clinical response, and root-cause-analysis training are addressed by a separate NHS England and Improvement response.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We understand from NHS England and Improvement that a separate response has been provided to yourself covering points 3, 4 and 5.”

    Source location

    2021-0115-Response-from-MHRA_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 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 NHS investigation frameworks require systems-based investigations by appropriately trained investigators, addressing the concern about root cause analysis training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In relation to concern 5, around Root Cause Analysis training, it is important to note that all NHS trusts are required to comply with the Serious Incident Framework (2015) when conducting patient safety incident investigations into incidents such as the tragic events described. The Framework states that;”

    Source location

    2021-0115-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 April 2021

    Open published response
  9. South Wales Central

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas William Browne · 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

    Thomas William Browne, a highly vulnerable patient dependent on non-invasive oxygen ventilation, was found collapsed in a hospital toilet on 17 July 2018 after being left there unaccompanied. His oxygen cylinder was exhausted when he was found, and the inquest concluded that he died from natural causes. Concerns included the absence of systems to monitor patients dependent on finite oxygen supplies, deficiencies in the root cause analysis, incomplete oxygen-administration training, and the lack of formal procedures for recording when oxygen supplies would expire.

    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

    Deficient root cause analysis failing to identify and address oxygen-supply monitoring issues

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The root cause analysis was accepted in evidence by the Trust to be deficient in that it did not identify and address this issue. ”

    Source location

    Thomas William Browne · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Gary Etherington · 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

    Gary Etherington was found dead in his van after taking an overdose of his wife’s Amitriptyline; the inquest concluded that his death was suicide. The coroner identified failures in the mental health assessment and discharge process, including inadequate investigation of psychotic symptoms and suicide risk, insufficient communication with the GP, and an unreliable Root Cause Analysis that failed to identify these care problems.

    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 Root Cause Analysis to recognise and investigate care problems

    Wider context from the report

    “3. Neither failure was recognised or investigated by the Root Cause Analysis which was described as Level 2 Comprehensive and concluded that there were no problems in health care. The court regarded the RCA investigation as unreliable. That causes some concern as to whether the Trust is able to identify care problems in future. ”

    Source location

    Gary Etherington · 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

    Commission and complete a review of the Trust’s process for managing and investigating serious incidents.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In July 2018 the Trust commissioned KPMG to undertake a review of the whole process of managing and investigating Serious Incidents and the final report published in October 2018. One of the recommendations from the review was that a central Serious Incidents Team should be created to deal specifically with oversight of the investigation and monitoring of all Serious Incidents. Prior to this, Serious Incidents were investigated within the Directorates as was the death of Mr Etherington which was investigated over a 3 month period (December 2018 to February 2019).”

    Source location

    2020-0134-Response-from-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 September 2020

    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

    Establish a central Serious Incidents Team to oversee investigations, monitor incidents, ensure follow-up and share learning across the Trust.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In July 2018 the Trust commissioned KPMG to undertake a review of the whole process of managing and investigating Serious Incidents and the final report published in October 2018. One of the recommendations from the review was that a central Serious Incidents Team should be created to deal specifically with oversight of the investigation and monitoring of all Serious Incidents. Prior to this, Serious Incidents were investigated within the Directorates as was the death of Mr Etherington which was investigated over a 3 month period (December 2018 to February 2019).”

    Source location

    2020-0134-Response-from-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 September 2020

    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

    Update the Incident Management Policy and Procedures to require investigating panels to consider care, family involvement, safety, equality and other incident issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, the Incident Management Policy and Procedures was updated in April 2019 (subsequently updated April 2020) to reflect the changes within the Serious Incident Team and stipulates that the Terms of Reference for the investigating panel must include:”

    Source location

    2020-0134-Response-from-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted.pdf
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 September 2020

    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

    No further investigation is required because the Trust’s revised Root Cause Analysis process is considered thorough and comprehensive.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since the implementation of these changes to the management of Serious Incidents in April 2019, the Trust is confident that investigations are thorough, reliable and identify problems in care, with appropriate action documented to address these.”

    Source location

    2020-0134-Response-from-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted.pdf
    Page 4 · response
    Published 14 September 2020

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026