27 Nov 2024 Kenneth George Willard KING · Prevention of Future Deaths report Norfolk
View report summary
Concerns raised 7 Reliance on subjective clinician judgment for decisions to perform physiological observations View source Delayed implementation of the required training programme View source Failure to maintain and review a complete view of a patient's presentation and deterioration across community visits View source Lack of a policy preventing untrained bank staff from applying for roles View source Limited clinical training of Health Care Practitioners View source Failure to use specific symptom questions when deciding whether physiological observations are required View source Lack of a formal structure for the timing and frequency of physiological observations in the community 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
Kenneth George Willard KING · 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
Kenneth George Willard KING had bilateral leg wounds requiring community nursing care, with delays in some visits and subsequent infection. He was admitted to hospital with cellulitis of both legs and died on 12 November 2023 from septic shock due to bilateral leg cellulitis. Concerns included the absence of a formal structure for physiological observations in community patients and delays in implementing staff training and restrictions on untrained bank staff.
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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Reliance on subjective clinician judgment for decisions to perform physiological observations
Wider context from the report “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community. Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP.
No specific questions are asked of the patient, such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken.
It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician , which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians .
Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that.
Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses.
In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Delayed implementation of the required training programme
Wider context from the report “2. Mr King died a year ago and although there is a training programme which is being devised and rolled out it is not expected to be in place for a further eighteen months . The policy to prevent bank staff applying for roles when they have not undergone the required training is not yet in place.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to maintain and review a complete view of a patient's presentation and deterioration across community visits
Wider context from the report “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community. Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP.
No specific questions are asked of the patient, such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken.
It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician, which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians.
Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration . Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that .
Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses.
In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of a policy preventing untrained bank staff from applying for roles
Wider context from the report “2. Mr King died a year ago and although there is a training programme which is being devised and rolled out it is not expected to be in place for a further eighteen months. The policy to prevent bank staff applying for roles when they have not undergone the required training is not yet in place .
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Limited clinical training of Health Care Practitioners
Wider context from the report “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community. Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP.
No specific questions are asked of the patient, such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken.
It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician, which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians.
Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that.
Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses .
In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to use specific symptom questions when deciding whether physiological observations are required
Wider context from the report “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community. Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP.
No specific questions are asked of the patient , such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken .
It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician, which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians.
Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that.
Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses.
In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of a formal structure for the timing and frequency of physiological observations in the community
Wider context from the report “1. Evidence was heard that there is no formal structure in place as to when or with regard to the frequency of carrying out physiological observations on patients in the community . Observations are required to be taken if the attending clinician has any concerns about the patient's wellbeing or a deterioration in their condition, or at the request of a senior clinician or GP.
No specific questions are asked of the patient, such as if they are feeling unwell, have pain or localised heat, the attending practitioner relies on general conversation carried out at their attendance to help form a view as to whether observations are required to be taken.
It was accepted in evidence that the decision to perform observations relies on the clinical judgment of the relevant clinician, which is a subjective decision which may be exercised incorrectly and at variance with other clinicians.
Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history prior to that.
Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses.
In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
” 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 Provide targeted deteriorating-patient training for podiatrists and non-registered community clinicians while investigating attendance barriers.
Verbatim wording from the response “Evidence was heard that Health Care Practitioners may have limited clinical training and rely on instructions and advice from trained nurses.
The trust holds a clinical training programme that is open to registered and non-registered clinicians as per the competency matrix. Additional sessions are held, such as the Deteriorating Patient Training, which is open to all staff. From review of the attendance logs, it is acknowledged that there is lower uptake of this training by community staff, particularly podiatrists and non-registered clinicians including phlebotomists. The training sessions will have a targeted focus on those staff groups, and we are currently gathering information to understand the barriers and challenges to good attendance levels. It is also recognised that different staff groups will need different levels of training.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Complete consultation and ratification of the newly developed community competency matrix.
Verbatim wording from the response “The current competency matrix has been under review and a newly developed community competency matrix has been out to consultation and is in the final stages of ratification. To support the competency management and sign off process, we have also developed competency passports aligned to each role. Each Place area will be completing a gap analysis of competency and training needs to ensure that our current clinical training programme is accessible and offers appropriate availability.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Complete place-level gap analyses of competency and training needs to improve training accessibility and availability.
Verbatim wording from the response “The current competency matrix has been under review and a newly developed community competency matrix has been out to consultation and is in the final stages of ratification. To support the competency management and sign off process, we have also developed competency passports aligned to each role. Each Place area will be completing a gap analysis of competency and training needs to ensure that our current clinical training programme is accessible and offers appropriate availability.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Include the assessment guide and escalation plan in Deteriorating Patient training.
Verbatim wording from the response “In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
Trust guidance was updated and disseminated to all clinical staff to mandate the completion of physiological observations on every initial patient visit with immediate effect. A community patient escalation plan has been published and cascaded to support staff in identifying patients at risk of deterioration and the escalation actions that are required which includes the completion of physiological observations.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Create a community patient assessment guide containing exploratory questions to identify changes in condition and required further action.
Verbatim wording from the response “A community patient assessment guide is being created which will provide exploratory questions that community staff can use to ascertain any changes in the patient’s condition and identify if any further action is required. Both of these documents and how to use them will be included in the Deteriorating Patient training.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 named-clinician and geographical-area caseloads and analyse the results to inform the future community nursing model.
Verbatim wording from the response “Handovers are completed to share learning and patient updates and clinical leads are available to support with complex patient discussions and escalation of conditions. As a trust we recognise the importance of continuity of care and are currently piloting a named clinician and geographical area caseload approach which is being analysed and will inform the development of our future community nursing model.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Mandate physiological observations during every initial community patient visit and disseminate the updated clinical guidance.
Verbatim wording from the response “In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
Trust guidance was updated and disseminated to all clinical staff to mandate the completion of physiological observations on every initial patient visit with immediate effect. A community patient escalation plan has been published and cascaded to support staff in identifying patients at risk of deterioration and the escalation actions that are required which includes the completion of physiological observations.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Deliver the clinical training programme on a rolling basis across locations, including enhanced wound-care and tissue-viability sessions.
Verbatim wording from the response “Concern 2: Mr King died a year ago and although there is a training programme which is being devised and rolled out it is not expected to be in place for a further eighteen months.
We would like to apologise if information previously presented has not been clear or has caused yourself or Mr King’s family any confusion. NCH&C has a full clinical training programme and currently is and will continue to be delivered on a rolling basis across various locations. Whilst most of the clinical training is provided by our clinical education team, additional or enhanced sessions are provided by subject matter experts. One example of this is the wound care and tissue viability training package that is provided by the Tissue Viability Specialist Nurse. I have included the 2025 wound care and tissue viability training plan for information.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Scope clinical training attendance and accessibility to identify barriers and challenges to participation.
Verbatim wording from the response “As part of the action plan, we are currently scoping all clinical training to understand previous attendance levels and accessibility of sessions, so we can understand barriers or challenges to accessing the training. The tissue viability wound care pathway has been a priority workstream within our community transformation programme, ‘Better for All’. The workstream has a number of quality improvement initiatives and focus areas such as the implementation of the National Wound Care Strategy guidance and the use of digital technology in wound care, which have different timeframes for completion. For clarity, the eighteen-month timeframe stated at the inquest was relating to the Better for all transformation programme duration and some of the individual initiatives, rather than the training programme which is on a rolling agenda.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 competency passports aligned to each clinical role to support competency management and sign-off.
Verbatim wording from the response “The current competency matrix has been under review and a newly developed community competency matrix has been out to consultation and is in the final stages of ratification. To support the competency management and sign off process, we have also developed competency passports aligned to each role. Each Place area will be completing a gap analysis of competency and training needs to ensure that our current clinical training programme is accessible and offers appropriate availability.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Publish and cascade a community patient escalation plan covering deterioration identification, escalation actions and physiological observations.
Verbatim wording from the response “In this case, evidence was heard that Mr King presented as feeling well but had high inflammatory markers, which may mask when observations are required to be carried out. Some patients may not be forthcoming about any symptoms unless specifically asked.
Trust guidance was updated and disseminated to all clinical staff to mandate the completion of physiological observations on every initial patient visit with immediate effect. A community patient escalation plan has been published and cascaded to support staff in identifying patients at risk of deterioration and the escalation actions that are required which includes the completion of physiological observations.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Restrict temporary-worker bookings for community shifts to staff known to the local team whose competencies are signed off.
Verbatim wording from the response “The policy to prevent bank staff applying for roles when they have not undergone the required training is not yet in place.
We acknowledge that there is inconsistent and variable levels of clinical supervision and monitoring/management of clinical competencies for this staff group. The majority of our bank staff are well known to the substantive teams and are supported with training and clinical supervision. The competency passports and matrix will provide a robust process for competency management moving forward. As part of the interim plan, restrictions are in place so that only temporary worker staff known to the local team and where competencies are signed off will be able to book community shifts.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
Open published response
×
Source evidence
How this respondent action was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation Conduct ongoing shadow and observational review shifts to assess non-registered clinicians’ practical skills and theoretical knowledge.
Verbatim wording from the response “Our non-registered clinicians do work under the delegation of registered staff who provide ongoing advice, support and review. Shadow and observational review shifts are completed to ensure competency of individuals in both practical skill and theoretical knowledge. This is an ongoing review process and will be supported with the competency passports. In addition to this monitoring and overview, there is an expectation that staff work within their limitations and escalate where further support and development is required.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 more consistent approaches to patient-record review before visits, including for urgent-care visits.
Verbatim wording from the response “All community clinicians are given thirty minutes protected time each day for visit preparation, which includes reviewing of patient records prior to visits. We acknowledge that the record review can be variable across clinicians practice and that is an area of focus to understand why. It is also recognised that clinicians responding to urgent care visits may not have the ability to review the record at all prior to the visit. We are looking at ways to ensure more consistency with the senior operational and quality leadership team.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 pressures make consistent allocation of individual community clinicians difficult, requiring staff movement to minimise patient risk.
Verbatim wording from the response “Different clinicians carry out visits in the community and so have no overall view of a patient's presentation and any deterioration. Written records are available but evidence was heard that in this case, on the last visit, the record of the previous attendance was looked at and no history from that visit.
Due to operational pressures and the need to work flexibly with staff allocation to ensure patients with priority and complex needs are seen in a timely manner, it continues to be very difficult to provide consistent staff allocation to individual patients. Whilst this would be best practice for continuity of care, escalation actions such as the movement of staff are sometimes required to minimise risk to our patients. Whenever possible continuity of care is maintained and patients most at risk or at end of life would be prioritised.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 Clinicians attending urgent care visits may be unable to review patient records before the visit, limiting consistent record review.
Verbatim wording from the response “All community clinicians are given thirty minutes protected time each day for visit preparation, which includes reviewing of patient records prior to visits. We acknowledge that the record review can be variable across clinicians practice and that is an area of focus to understand why. It is also recognised that clinicians responding to urgent care visits may not have the ability to review the record at all prior to the visit. We are looking at ways to ensure more consistency with the senior operational and quality leadership team.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
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 eighteen-month timeframe applied to the transformation programme and some initiatives, not to the rolling clinical training programme.
Verbatim wording from the response “Concern 2: Mr King died a year ago and although there is a training programme which is being devised and rolled out it is not expected to be in place for a further eighteen months.
We would like to apologise if information previously presented has not been clear or has caused yourself or Mr King’s family any confusion. NCH&C has a full clinical training programme and currently is and will continue to be delivered on a rolling basis across various locations. Whilst most of the clinical training is provided by our clinical education team, additional or enhanced sessions are provided by subject matter experts. One example of this is the wound care and tissue viability training package that is provided by the Tissue Viability Specialist Nurse. I have included the 2025 wound care and tissue viability training plan for information.” Source location Response from Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust
Open published response
5 Aug 2014 JOHN HENRY WILSHER · Prevention of Future Deaths report Norfolk
View report summary
Concerns raised 4 Failure to communicate concerns about care home adequacy View source Delays in NCC Community Services assessments View source Unavailability of nursing assessment outcomes during community services assessments View source Inaccurate information in NNUH discharge letters View source See 1 more concern
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
JOHN HENRY WILSHER · 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
Mr Wilsher, a resident of Springdale Care Home, deteriorated after falls and was found to have extradural and subdural haemorrhages. He died on 21 December 2013 after discharge from hospital to the care home, which quickly became unable to cope with his mobility. Concerns included inaccurate discharge information, inadequate communication about his care needs and prior referral, and delays or gaps in care assessments.
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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to communicate concerns about care home adequacy
Wider context from the report “(2) Concerns were raised by the GP and a referral made to NCC Community Services on 25 November 2013 as to the suitability of the Care Home in providing care to Mr Wilsher due to his deteriorating condition. He was admitted to NNUH on 27 November 2013 for assessment and plans were made for discharge to the Care Home. Neither NNUH nor the Care Home were aware concerns had already been raised (prior to a further deterioration in his condition) as to the adequacy of the Care Home to cope with his needs . On Mr Wilsher’s discharge to the Care Home it quickly became apparent they could not cope with his needs.
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Delays in NCC Community Services assessments
Wider context from the report “(3) An assessment was carried out by NCC Community Services on 13 December 2013 by which time Mr Wilsher had been admitted to NNUH and discharged and plans were already in place for his transfer to a nursing home .
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Unavailability of nursing assessment outcomes during community services assessments
Wider context from the report “(4) The outcome of the Nursing Assessment carried out on 10 December 2013 was not available at the time of the Community Services Assessment .
” 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 East of England Community Health and Care NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Inaccurate information in NNUH discharge letters
Wider context from the report “(1) The information contained in the NNUH Discharge Letter is inaccurate ;
” Open source report
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations