14 Nov 2023 Maxwell Frame · Prevention of Future Deaths report West Yorkshire (Western)
View report summary
Concerns raised 1 Absence of a national policy on the placement of central venous catheters View source
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
×
AI-generated summary
Maxwell Frame · 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
Maxwell Frame presented with sepsis caused by a pelvic abscess and bowel obstruction and underwent emergency surgery. A central venous catheter was incorrectly inserted into an artery and was later removed; clot dislodged during removal, causing strokes, after which he received palliative care and died. The report identified concern about the absence of a single national policy for central venous catheter placement.
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. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Absence of a national policy on the placement of central venous catheters
Wider context from the report “Absence of a national policy on the placement of CVC’s
Over the course of the inquest hearing, oral evidence was provided by several anaesthetic/ ICU doctors ranging from experienced consultants, specialty Dr’s and a Core Trainee 2 all of whom had experience to varying degrees of placing CVC’s. These Dr’s had worked in several hospitals predominantly across the Midlands and North of England. The Trust had a policy entitled Central Venous Access Device which identified the steps that I have identified earlier should have taken place but were not. I was advised by the Dr’s who gave evidence that there was no single standard policy that they had encountered nationally for the placement of CVC’s . The Trust in this case following their internal investigation of Mr Frame’s case had felt it necessary to revise their policy. Further, I was advised by some of the Dr’s who gave evidence that they felt a national policy regarding the placement of CVC’s would be beneficial.
” Open source report
17 Dec 2021 Nichola Jane Lomax · Prevention of Future Deaths report Manchester North
View report summary
Concerns raised 16 Under-reporting of eating disorder deaths to the coroner View source Lack of clear responsibility for monitoring and co-ordinating community eating disorder care View source Absence of an acute hospital liaison psychiatry service View source Poor and inaccurate compilation of clinical documentation View source Poor nursing care for patients with eating disorders View source Lack of dissemination and understanding of MARSIPAN guidance among medical professionals View source Lack of appropriate investigation and learning from eating disorder deaths View source Failures and delays in maintaining and re-referring patients on the Priory waiting list View source Unclear Priory referral and admission criteria for medically stable patients with low BMI View source Absence of an allocated consultant psychiatrist for CEDS in Bury and six other Manchester boroughs View source Failure to conduct incident reviews of referral failures View source Failure to closely monitor food intake and purging behaviours View source Absence of pathways for acute clinicians to access specialist eating disorder advice View source Lack of formally commissioned community monitoring provision for moderate- or high-risk eating disorder patients View source Exclusion of patients with BMI below 14 from the Community Eating Disorder Service View source Failure to maintain nutrition and fluid charts View source See 13 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
×
AI-generated summary
Nichola Jane Lomax · 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
Nichola Jane Lomax had a long history of an eating disorder and attended hospital several times in 2020 with severe malnutrition and electrolyte imbalance. She died on 3 August 2020 after delays and failings involving hospital treatment, specialist referral, communication, monitoring, nutritional care and access to appropriate services. The report identified concerns about inadequate eating-dis disorder training, access to specialist advice, referral criteria, critical services, community monitoring, nursing care and investigation of 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. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Under-reporting of eating disorder deaths to the coroner
Wider context from the report “7) Lack of Recognition of the need to Investigate
For National Medical Examiner
It was of concern to the court that the only reason Nichola’s death was referred to HM Coroner was her initial medical cause of death had incorrectly included paracetamol toxicity. It was not until the court investigated this case, that there was any recognition by any of the agencies that there had been failings in the care of Nichola. If this death had not been reported to the Coroner, none of the above failings or the need for learning would have been identified. The court is extremely concerned that there is the real potential for under reporting of such cases and a lack of appropriate investigation to ensure learning is captured so as to prevent future deaths. This is important given the court heard eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of any mental disorder.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of clear responsibility for monitoring and co-ordinating community eating disorder care
Wider context from the report “3) Referral Criteria for the Priory and Community Eating Disorder Service
For GMMH, PRIORY, BURY CLINICAL COMMISSIONING, ICB
In Greater Manchester the Community Eating Disorder Service (CEDS) do not accept patients who have a BMI of less than 14. The court heard this is in part due to the structure and commissioning of the service. Adherence to this criteria had the following implications for Nichola’s care:
• As the only service who can refer to the Priory, CEDS became aware of Nichola. CEDS involvement created the impression that they were providing care to her. This created a confused picture as to who was co-ordinating her care .
• This meant that monitoring of Nichola was undertaken by the GP practice who were not specialists and had limited knowledge of eating disorders . It would have been more clinically appropriate for CEDS to have taken on this role and the court heard that in many other areas of the country the CEDS accept patients with BMIs lower than 14 and have responsibility for the monitoring and co-ordination of patients.
The Court heard evidence from a number of practitioners as to their understanding of the referral criteria for Nichola to be admitted to The Priory. The clear impression given by The Priory was that Nichola would not be accepted until 1) a bed became available but also 2) her BMI increased to somewhere around 12/13. The Court was told that the rationale for this is that a patient with a BMI below 13 is at high risk of refeeding according to MARSIPAN and more likely to require an acute hospital admission.
This impression meant that hospital clinicians and the GP understood that Nichola would not be accepted by the Priory until her weight had increased. However the court heard that the Priory can take someone with a BMI of less than 13 if medically stable and the benefits of specialist care outweigh the risks of refeeding. Given the impression created by the Priory no attempt was made to obtain an emergency bed for Nichola who was medically stable for some time after the 11th June.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Absence of an acute hospital liaison psychiatry service
Wider context from the report “4) Lack of Critical Services
For BURY CCG / ICB / GMHSCP
The Court heard evidence that despite FGH having a 24/7 Emergency Department, adherence had not been paid to NICE guidance which recommends the establishment of an Acute Liaison Psychiatry service. In this case the court heard that such a service would have provided continuity of care and psychiatric input. The only available psychiatry input at Fairfield hospital for the acute staff is either within the A&E department where there are psychiatric nurses or using the on-call psychiatrist, this post being on call for all psychiatry matters within the whole of Bury. There is no specific liaison psychiatric service for the Acute Hospital .
The evidence was that there is no Consultant Psychiatrist allocated to the CEDS in Bury or the 6 other boroughs of Manchester. However even though the CEDS is provided by the same mental health trust, it is only one of Manchester that does have an allocated Consultant Psychiatrist.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Poor and inaccurate compilation of clinical documentation
Wider context from the report “6) Nursing Input and Recording
For NCA
Notwithstanding that the NCA made admissions in relation to the clinical care provided to Nichola, the Serious Incident Review did not consider the nursing input. Evidence during the course of the Inquest showed the nursing input to be poor and lacking in basic care. There were no nutrition / fluid charts on her first admission in June. There was a lack of close monitoring of her food and purging behaviours which would have been essential information to provide to the Doctors involved in setting her treatment plan. There was a poor documentation and incorrect compilation of documentation which highlighted her malnutrition but then recorded conflicting information .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Poor nursing care for patients with eating disorders
Wider context from the report “6) Nursing Input and Recording
For NCA
Notwithstanding that the NCA made admissions in relation to the clinical care provided to Nichola, the Serious Incident Review did not consider the nursing input. Evidence during the course of the Inquest showed the nursing input to be poor and lacking in basic care . There were no nutrition / fluid charts on her first admission in June. There was a lack of close monitoring of her food and purging behaviours which would have been essential information to provide to the Doctors involved in setting her treatment plan. There was a poor documentation and incorrect compilation of documentation which highlighted her malnutrition but then recorded conflicting information.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of dissemination and understanding of MARSIPAN guidance among medical professionals
Wider context from the report “1) Inadequate Training of doctors and other medical professionals re eating disorders
For National / NCA / Royal College of Psychiatrists
Over 30 members of the medical profession saw Nichola during her three admissions to FGH in 2020. Of those, only one had knowledge of MARSIPAN and his understanding of MARSIPAN was extremely limited. This is not a question of lack of familiarity by professionals, it reflects a complete absence of any understanding that MARSPAN exists and indeed how to implement it in respect of the emergency treatment of an anorexic patient .
Previous Regulation 28 reports suggests this remains an ongoing concern nationally and MARSIPAN is not being disseminated to practitioners on the ground .
Whilst MARSIPAN can be accessed via a link in the NICE guidance on Eating Disorders. My concern is that Acute Trusts may not have sufficient regard to Guidance issued by Royal College of Psychiatry which is relevant to the medical care which they provide.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of appropriate investigation and learning from eating disorder deaths
Wider context from the report “7) Lack of Recognition of the need to Investigate
For National Medical Examiner
It was of concern to the court that the only reason Nichola’s death was referred to HM Coroner was her initial medical cause of death had incorrectly included paracetamol toxicity. It was not until the court investigated this case, that there was any recognition by any of the agencies that there had been failings in the care of Nichola. If this death had not been reported to the Coroner, none of the above failings or the need for learning would have been identified. The court is extremely concerned that there is the real potential for under reporting of such cases and a lack of appropriate investigation to ensure learning is captured so as to prevent future deaths . This is important given the court heard eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of any mental disorder.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failures and delays in maintaining and re-referring patients on the Priory waiting list
Wider context from the report “7) Delay in Re-Referral
For GMMH/PRIORY
Due to a misunderstanding following the telephone discussion between the Priory and FGH on 11th June Nichola was clearly removed from the Priory waiting list . This led to confusion for the GP practice who did not know why she had been removed. There was then a delay by the CEDS in re-referring Nichola which meant only one bed being available. This should not have occurred and more worryingly had not been noted as there had been no incident review of this case by either the Priory or the CEDS.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Unclear Priory referral and admission criteria for medically stable patients with low BMI
Wider context from the report “3) Referral Criteria for the Priory and Community Eating Disorder Service
For GMMH, PRIORY, BURY CLINICAL COMMISSIONING, ICB
In Greater Manchester the Community Eating Disorder Service (CEDS) do not accept patients who have a BMI of less than 14. The court heard this is in part due to the structure and commissioning of the service. Adherence to this criteria had the following implications for Nichola’s care:
• As the only service who can refer to the Priory, CEDS became aware of Nichola. CEDS involvement created the impression that they were providing care to her. This created a confused picture as to who was co-ordinating her care.
• This meant that monitoring of Nichola was undertaken by the GP practice who were not specialists and had limited knowledge of eating disorders. It would have been more clinically appropriate for CEDS to have taken on this role and the court heard that in many other areas of the country the CEDS accept patients with BMIs lower than 14 and have responsibility for the monitoring and co-ordination of patients.
The Court heard evidence from a number of practitioners as to their understanding of the referral criteria for Nichola to be admitted to The Priory. The clear impression given by The Priory was that Nichola would not be accepted until 1) a bed became available but also 2) her BMI increased to somewhere around 12/13 . The Court was told that the rationale for this is that a patient with a BMI below 13 is at high risk of refeeding according to MARSIPAN and more likely to require an acute hospital admission.
This impression meant that hospital clinicians and the GP understood that Nichola would not be accepted by the Priory until her weight had increased. However the court heard that the Priory can take someone with a BMI of less than 13 if medically stable and the benefits of specialist care outweigh the risks of refeeding . Given the impression created by the Priory no attempt was made to obtain an emergency bed for Nichola who was medically stable for some time after the 11th June.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Absence of an allocated consultant psychiatrist for CEDS in Bury and six other Manchester boroughs
Wider context from the report “4) Lack of Critical Services
For BURY CCG / ICB / GMHSCP
The Court heard evidence that despite FGH having a 24/7 Emergency Department, adherence had not been paid to NICE guidance which recommends the establishment of an Acute Liaison Psychiatry service. In this case the court heard that such a service would have provided continuity of care and psychiatric input. The only available psychiatry input at Fairfield hospital for the acute staff is either within the A&E department where there are psychiatric nurses or using the on-call psychiatrist, this post being on call for all psychiatry matters within the whole of Bury. There is no specific liaison psychiatric service for the Acute Hospital.
The evidence was that there is no Consultant Psychiatrist allocated to the CEDS in Bury or the 6 other boroughs of Manchester . However even though the CEDS is provided by the same mental health trust, it is only one of Manchester that does have an allocated Consultant Psychiatrist.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to conduct incident reviews of referral failures
Wider context from the report “7) Delay in Re-Referral
For GMMH/PRIORY
Due to a misunderstanding following the telephone discussion between the Priory and FGH on 11th June Nichola was clearly removed from the Priory waiting list. This led to confusion for the GP practice who did not know why she had been removed. There was then a delay by the CEDS in re-referring Nichola which meant only one bed being available. This should not have occurred and more worryingly had not been noted as there had been no incident review of this case by either the Priory or the CEDS .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to closely monitor food intake and purging behaviours
Wider context from the report “6) Nursing Input and Recording
For NCA
Notwithstanding that the NCA made admissions in relation to the clinical care provided to Nichola, the Serious Incident Review did not consider the nursing input. Evidence during the course of the Inquest showed the nursing input to be poor and lacking in basic care. There were no nutrition / fluid charts on her first admission in June. There was a lack of close monitoring of her food and purging behaviours which would have been essential information to provide to the Doctors involved in setting her treatment plan. There was a poor documentation and incorrect compilation of documentation which highlighted her malnutrition but then recorded conflicting information.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Absence of pathways for acute clinicians to access specialist eating disorder advice
Wider context from the report “2) Accessing Specialist Advice
For National, NCA/GMMH/PRIORY
None of the practitioners in Nichola’s case knew how to access specialist eating disorder advice including medical or dietetic advice . There are no pathways to assist acute clinicians in how to access this specialist advice . To this day the clinicians told the Court they would not know where to go other than to try and contact the Priory. The Court heard from the Priory they are not commissioned to provide advice.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of formally commissioned community monitoring provision for moderate- or high-risk eating disorder patients
Wider context from the report “5) Community Monitoring of patients with an Eating Disorder
For BURY CCG / NATIONAL / ICB/ GMHSCP
There is a lack of clarity as to whether there is any formally commissioned provision for the monitoring of moderate or high risk Eating Disorder patients within the community . The Court heard from GMHSCP that this was the responsibility of primary care however it was unclear whether this was known by those working in primary care and whether this service had ever been commissioned .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Exclusion of patients with BMI below 14 from the Community Eating Disorder Service
Wider context from the report “3) Referral Criteria for the Priory and Community Eating Disorder Service
For GMMH, PRIORY, BURY CLINICAL COMMISSIONING, ICB
In Greater Manchester the Community Eating Disorder Service (CEDS) do not accept patients who have a BMI of less than 14 . The court heard this is in part due to the structure and commissioning of the service. Adherence to this criteria had the following implications for Nichola’s care:
• As the only service who can refer to the Priory, CEDS became aware of Nichola. CEDS involvement created the impression that they were providing care to her. This created a confused picture as to who was co-ordinating her care.
• This meant that monitoring of Nichola was undertaken by the GP practice who were not specialists and had limited knowledge of eating disorders. It would have been more clinically appropriate for CEDS to have taken on this role and the court heard that in many other areas of the country the CEDS accept patients with BMIs lower than 14 and have responsibility for the monitoring and co-ordination of patients.
The Court heard evidence from a number of practitioners as to their understanding of the referral criteria for Nichola to be admitted to The Priory. The clear impression given by The Priory was that Nichola would not be accepted until 1) a bed became available but also 2) her BMI increased to somewhere around 12/13. The Court was told that the rationale for this is that a patient with a BMI below 13 is at high risk of refeeding according to MARSIPAN and more likely to require an acute hospital admission.
This impression meant that hospital clinicians and the GP understood that Nichola would not be accepted by the Priory until her weight had increased. However the court heard that the Priory can take someone with a BMI of less than 13 if medically stable and the benefits of specialist care outweigh the risks of refeeding. Given the impression created by the Priory no attempt was made to obtain an emergency bed for Nichola who was medically stable for some time after the 11th June.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to maintain nutrition and fluid charts
Wider context from the report “6) Nursing Input and Recording
For NCA
Notwithstanding that the NCA made admissions in relation to the clinical care provided to Nichola, the Serious Incident Review did not consider the nursing input. Evidence during the course of the Inquest showed the nursing input to be poor and lacking in basic care. There were no nutrition / fluid charts on her first admission in June . There was a lack of close monitoring of her food and purging behaviours which would have been essential information to provide to the Doctors involved in setting her treatment plan. There was a poor documentation and incorrect compilation of documentation which highlighted her malnutrition but then recorded conflicting information.
” Open source report
Concerns raised 7 Unavailability of consultant-level psychiatric input to eating disorder services View source Inadequate training and knowledge of eating disorders among medical professionals View source Under-reporting and inadequate recording and investigation of eating-disorder-related deaths View source Lack of robust and reliable prevalence data for eating disorders View source Shortage of eating disorder specialists View source Lack of formally commissioned monitoring provision for moderate to high risk Anorexia Nervosa patients View source COVID-19 pandemic exacerbation of eating disorder safety deficiencies View source See 4 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Averil Hart · 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
Averil Hart died from anorexia nervosa on 15 December 2012, after severe weight loss and deterioration following her discharge from specialist eating-disorder treatment. The report identified concerns about inadequate monitoring and coordination of care, insufficient eating-disorder training and specialist provision, failures to provide nutritional support, delays and miscommunication in hospital care, inadequate data on eating-disorder prevalence and deaths, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
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. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Unavailability of consultant-level psychiatric input to eating disorder services
Wider context from the report “(2) Lack of formally commissioned service level agreement for the provision of robust and effective monitoring of moderate to high risk AN patients by primary or secondary care providers
Evidence confirmed that in response to the PHSO Report an Expert Reference Group (ERG) was convened by NHS England (NHSE) to address the specific recommendation for NHSE to review the existing quality and availability of services to achieve parity for adult ED services with children and young people’s ED services. The National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) was commissioned to develop new guidance published in August 2019: “Adult Eating Disorders: Community, Inpatient and Intensive Day Patient Care – Guidance for Commissioners and Providers”.
However, the clear and unchallenged evidence received at Averil’s inquest confirmed that there remains a lack of formally commissioned provision for the monitoring of AN patients in primary or secondary care across large parts of the United Kingdom. Whilst the evidence received indicated that Cambridgeshire & Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust are seeking to develop models to ensure the provision of medical monitoring for all ED sufferers, including moderate to high risk patients, there are many areas in the country – including parts of the East of England Region – which still have no such formally commissioned provision. Further, unchallenged evidence identified a number of regions as not even having consultant level psychiatric in-put to the ED services that are purportedly available .
There was unanimity on the part of each of the senior clinicians who gave evidence, as well as a number of independent, instructed experts in the fields of ED and AN, that the continued absence of such monitoring and treatment provision gave rise to not only the risk of avoidable future deaths, but - in the views of many - the inevitability of the same. Evidence confirmed that whilst AN has the highest mortality of any mental disorder affecting young people and adults this should not be simply accepted and that AN and other EDs are treatable mental disorders, with even severe complications such as malnutrition safely reversible. The evidence further established that whilst in the long term primary prevention strategies including early recognition and treatment of the disease was critical, in the short to medium term, improving access to treatment and the effective monitoring of the severely ill is to be regarded as essential to address the risk of avoidable future deaths.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Inadequate training and knowledge of eating disorders among medical professionals
Wider context from the report “(1) Inadequate training of doctors and other medical professionals re eating disorders
Evidence from a wide range of clinicians who had engaged with Averil in 2012 echoed the evidence of clinicians attending the four inquests of the women referred to above. All five inquests revealed a common theme of wide-spread and continuing lack of training, knowledge, or experience on the part of physicians and medical staff (including GPs and nurse practitioners, as well as acute hospital doctors, nurses and dieticians) regarding eating disorders (EDs) and specifically Anorexia Nervosa (AN). Many witnesses (from both the death 2012 and those in 2017/2018) conceded that they had only the most superficial knowledge of the often complex issues relating to recognition, monitoring, management and treatment of EDs and AN specifically. Their evidence often reflected a lack of familiarity with the King’s College Guidance for the treatment of AN in the community. The evidence of hospital staff revealed, at best, inconsistent implementation of the Royal College of Psychiatrists MARSIPAN guidance for the emergency treatment of AN patients and, at worst, a failure to implement the Guidance at all .
Evidence at Averil’s inquest (and at those of ████████) suggested that limited progress has been made in respect of the PHSO recommendation with regard to the training of doctors and other medical professionals, (notwithstanding the further recommendations of the PACAC Follow-up Report and the Government Response to the latter’s Recommendations). These concerns have been reiterated by the Position Statement of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (PS04/20) of September 2020 “Improving core skills and competence in risk assessment and management of people with eating disorders: What all doctors need to know.”
The evidence at inquest of senior practitioners in the fields of psychiatry, psychology, acute medicine, dietetics, gastroenterology and GP practice all confirmed that there remains, as there was in 2012, a continuing and serious shortage of eating disorder specialists across the country with many Trusts finding it difficult to fill vacancies; such shortages inevitably impact upon the level and quality of support available to primary care providers and other specialists and therefore, in my view, risks avoidable future deaths.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Under-reporting and inadequate recording and investigation of eating-disorder-related deaths
Wider context from the report “(3) Lack of robust and reliable data regarding the prevalence of eating disorders
Evidence also confirmed that the lack of precise information on the prevalence of eating disorders in the United Kingdom, described by the PHSO Report and the PACAC Follow-up Report as “shocking, given the claim that up to 1.25 million people are suffering from an eating disorder and the fact that eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of mental illnesses” persists. The witness evidence also confirmed the view expressed in the PACAC Report. “This vagueness limits the ability of NHS commissioners to gauge what services need to be provided and encourages them to devote resources to better recorded diseases.”
Further, I am concerned that there may also be a significant under-reporting of the extent to which EDs have caused or contributed to deaths , leading to cases either not being referred to the coroner or, if they are, the coroner in question determining that death was one of ‘natural causes’, with only the terminal cause of death, and not the underlying ED cause or contribution to the death, being recorded . In such circumstances there is a concern that a number of such deaths (where, for example, lack of care may have contributed to the death) are neither investigated appropriately by the coroner nor taken to inquest with a concomitant risk of a significant under-estimation of the true mortality rate of EDs.
(I propose to explore this issue in separate correspondence with the Medical Examiner for England and Wales (copied in to this Report), the Office for National Statistics and the Coroners’ Society of England and Wales).
In my view, taken together, the absence of statistically robust data on the numbers of those suffering from EDs and the potential under-estimation of those deaths to which EDs may have caused or contributed, gives rise to an objective risk that avoidable ED deaths will continue in the future.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of robust and reliable prevalence data for eating disorders
Wider context from the report “(3) Lack of robust and reliable data regarding the prevalence of eating disorders
Evidence also confirmed that the lack of precise information on the prevalence of eating disorders in the United Kingdom , described by the PHSO Report and the PACAC Follow-up Report as “shocking, given the claim that up to 1.25 million people are suffering from an eating disorder and the fact that eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of mental illnesses” persists. The witness evidence also confirmed the view expressed in the PACAC Report. “This vagueness limits the ability of NHS commissioners to gauge what services need to be provided and encourages them to devote resources to better recorded diseases.”
Further, I am concerned that there may also be a significant under-reporting of the extent to which EDs have caused or contributed to deaths, leading to cases either not being referred to the coroner or, if they are, the coroner in question determining that death was one of ‘natural causes’, with only the terminal cause of death, and not the underlying ED cause or contribution to the death, being recorded. In such circumstances there is a concern that a number of such deaths (where, for example, lack of care may have contributed to the death) are neither investigated appropriately by the coroner nor taken to inquest with a concomitant risk of a significant under-estimation of the true mortality rate of EDs.
(I propose to explore this issue in separate correspondence with the Medical Examiner for England and Wales (copied in to this Report), the Office for National Statistics and the Coroners’ Society of England and Wales).
In my view, taken together, the absence of statistically robust data on the numbers of those suffering from EDs and the potential under-estimation of those deaths to which EDs may have caused or contributed, gives rise to an objective risk that avoidable ED deaths will continue in the future.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Shortage of eating disorder specialists
Wider context from the report “(1) Inadequate training of doctors and other medical professionals re eating disorders
Evidence from a wide range of clinicians who had engaged with Averil in 2012 echoed the evidence of clinicians attending the four inquests of the women referred to above. All five inquests revealed a common theme of wide-spread and continuing lack of training, knowledge, or experience on the part of physicians and medical staff (including GPs and nurse practitioners, as well as acute hospital doctors, nurses and dieticians) regarding eating disorders (EDs) and specifically Anorexia Nervosa (AN). Many witnesses (from both the death 2012 and those in 2017/2018) conceded that they had only the most superficial knowledge of the often complex issues relating to recognition, monitoring, management and treatment of EDs and AN specifically. Their evidence often reflected a lack of familiarity with the King’s College Guidance for the treatment of AN in the community. The evidence of hospital staff revealed, at best, inconsistent implementation of the Royal College of Psychiatrists MARSIPAN guidance for the emergency treatment of AN patients and, at worst, a failure to implement the Guidance at all.
Evidence at Averil’s inquest (and at those of ████████) suggested that limited progress has been made in respect of the PHSO recommendation with regard to the training of doctors and other medical professionals, (notwithstanding the further recommendations of the PACAC Follow-up Report and the Government Response to the latter’s Recommendations). These concerns have been reiterated by the Position Statement of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (PS04/20) of September 2020 “Improving core skills and competence in risk assessment and management of people with eating disorders: What all doctors need to know.”
The evidence at inquest of senior practitioners in the fields of psychiatry, psychology, acute medicine, dietetics, gastroenterology and GP practice all confirmed that there remains, as there was in 2012, a continuing and serious shortage of eating disorder specialists across the country with many Trusts finding it difficult to fill vacancies ; such shortages inevitably impact upon the level and quality of support available to primary care providers and other specialists and therefore, in my view, risks avoidable future deaths.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of formally commissioned monitoring provision for moderate to high risk Anorexia Nervosa patients
Wider context from the report “(2) Lack of formally commissioned service level agreement for the provision of robust and effective monitoring of moderate to high risk AN patients by primary or secondary care providers
Evidence confirmed that in response to the PHSO Report an Expert Reference Group (ERG) was convened by NHS England (NHSE) to address the specific recommendation for NHSE to review the existing quality and availability of services to achieve parity for adult ED services with children and young people’s ED services. The National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) was commissioned to develop new guidance published in August 2019: “Adult Eating Disorders: Community, Inpatient and Intensive Day Patient Care – Guidance for Commissioners and Providers”.
However, the clear and unchallenged evidence received at Averil’s inquest confirmed that there remains a lack of formally commissioned provision for the monitoring of AN patients in primary or secondary care across large parts of the United Kingdom . Whilst the evidence received indicated that Cambridgeshire & Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust are seeking to develop models to ensure the provision of medical monitoring for all ED sufferers, including moderate to high risk patients, there are many areas in the country – including parts of the East of England Region – which still have no such formally commissioned provision. Further, unchallenged evidence identified a number of regions as not even having consultant level psychiatric in-put to the ED services that are purportedly available.
There was unanimity on the part of each of the senior clinicians who gave evidence, as well as a number of independent, instructed experts in the fields of ED and AN, that the continued absence of such monitoring and treatment provision gave rise to not only the risk of avoidable future deaths, but - in the views of many - the inevitability of the same. Evidence confirmed that whilst AN has the highest mortality of any mental disorder affecting young people and adults this should not be simply accepted and that AN and other EDs are treatable mental disorders, with even severe complications such as malnutrition safely reversible. The evidence further established that whilst in the long term primary prevention strategies including early recognition and treatment of the disease was critical, in the short to medium term, improving access to treatment and the effective monitoring of the severely ill is to be regarded as essential to address the risk of avoidable future deaths.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation COVID-19 pandemic exacerbation of eating disorder safety deficiencies
Wider context from the report “(4) The impact of the COVID 19 pandemic
I am concerned that the matters giving rise to the risk of future deaths identified at points (1) to (3) above have been - and will continue to be - significantly exacerbated by the on-going pandemic . I therefore request that responses to the above recognise and expressly address this concern.
” 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 Create shared curricula content on eating disorders and other training topics with relevant medical colleges.
Verbatim wording from the response “We are keen to do all we can to improve the training of doctors, as part of wider efforts to ensure such tragic circumstances are not repeated. However, we are a small organisation, dependent on external funding to perform much of this role. We have been granted a small amount of funding from the GMC to work with all relevant colleges to create a suite of shared curricula content. This will cover many areas of training and ensure high standards across the various medical disciplines. This resource would then be offered to all colleges. Following the PHSO report and contact with Baroness Parminter, eating disorders and anorexia nervosa are high on the longlist of topics we wish to tackle as capacity and resource permits.” Source location 2021-0058-Academy-of-Medical-Royal-Colleges-Redacted
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 Individual royal colleges are responsible for developing specialty training curricula, subject to General Medical Council approval.
Verbatim wording from the response “The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges is the coordinating body for the UK and Ireland’s 23 medical Royal Colleges and Faculties. We ensure that patients are safely and properly cared for by setting standards for the way doctors are educated, trained and monitored throughout their careers. Individual royal colleges are independent organisations who are responsible for training their members in their particular specialty. Each college develops its own curriculum that must be approved by the General Medical Council (GMC).” Source location 2021-0058-Academy-of-Medical-Royal-Colleges-Redacted
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 Work on eating-disorder training materials is constrained by limited external funding, organisational capacity and available resources.
Verbatim wording from the response “We are keen to do all we can to improve the training of doctors, as part of wider efforts to ensure such tragic circumstances are not repeated. However, we are a small organisation, dependent on external funding to perform much of this role. We have been granted a small amount of funding from the GMC to work with all relevant colleges to create a suite of shared curricula content. This will cover many areas of training and ensure high standards across the various medical disciplines. This resource would then be offered to all colleges. Following the PHSO report and contact with Baroness Parminter, eating disorders and anorexia nervosa are high on the longlist of topics we wish to tackle as capacity and resource permits.” Source location 2021-0058-Academy-of-Medical-Royal-Colleges-Redacted
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 Shared resources cannot be mandated because member organisations may choose whether to adopt them.
Verbatim wording from the response “One of the Academy’s roles is to bring colleges together to identify and share best practice and ensure this is disseminated across all colleges. This includes education and training, guidance, and policies. We generate resources that our member organisations are free to take up or not, as they choose; we cannot mandate uptake.” Source location 2021-0058-Academy-of-Medical-Royal-Colleges-Redacted
Open published response
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations