Recipient

Darlington Memorial Hospital

Pin Request correction

First report 30 Mar 2015•Latest report 30 Mar 2015

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Health and care · Healthcare site. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Darlington Memorial Hospital linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. County Durham and Darlington

    AI-generated summary

    Andrea Jane Thirkell · 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

    Andrea Jane Thirkell had an unwitnessed fall at a nursing home and was taken to hospital, where she was deemed fit for discharge but remained in the department for several hours without structured monitoring or observation. She returned to the nursing home, was found unresponsive, and was later diagnosed at hospital with a serious head injury before dying later that day. Concerns related to the lack of formal monitoring during delayed discharge and the absence of formal guidance for late-night discharges, which could result in inconsistent or potentially erroneous decisions.

    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 Darlington Memorial Hospital; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide structured monitoring or formal observations during delayed discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Although considered to be medically fit for discharge at 19.25 hours she did not leave the department until 23.03 and during that time she was not subject to any structured form of monitoring or observation although nursing staff may have seen her during that time. Evidence was given that since this incident staff have been reminded that patients should be subject to formal observations if there is a delay in discharge. Although I was told this I am unclear as to whether there is a formal trust policy in place in this regard. ”
    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 Darlington Memorial Hospital; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of formal policy or written guidance for safe late-at-night discharge decisions

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The deceased did not leave the department until 23.03. Evidence was given that it is common for patients to be discharged late on a night either home or to a care home knowing that there is likely to be nursing care available. The evidence I heard was that there was no formal trust policy or written guidance with regard to the issue of late at night discharge and what other factors need to be taken account of in considering whether it is safe to discharge a patient at such time and in what circumstances. The evidence was that each senior doctor will apply his or her own medical discretion and combined with the pressures on a busy department I am concerned that this could lead to inconsistent or potentially erroneous decisions being made. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026