Recipient

Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited

Pin Request correction

First report 3 Feb 2017•Latest report 3 Feb 2017

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Private limited company. 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 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. London Inner (South)

    AI-generated summary

    ROBERT ENTENMAN · 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

    Robert Entenman was an intubated intensive care patient whose humidifier was turned off from around 12.00pm on 22 May 2015 until 6.00am on 23 May 2015. A mucus plug blocked his endotracheal tube, leading to cardiac arrest shortly after 6.00am; he died on 30 May 2015. Concerns included failures to observe that the humidifier was off, the absence of an alarm on the humidifier, delays in identifying and replacing the blocked tube, and possible delays in communicating suction difficulties to doctors.

    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 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delays in communicating suction catheter difficulties to doctors

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) There were delays in identifying that the endotracheal tube had become blocked between 5.32 and 6.00am on 23 May 2015, and thus replacing it earlier. There may have been further such delays after 6.00 am. There may have been a delay by the nursing staff in providing information about difficulties with the suction catheter to the doctors who arrived after the cardiac arrest call was put out. ”
    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 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delays in identifying and replacing blocked endotracheal tubes

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) There were delays in identifying that the endotracheal tube had become blocked between 5.32 and 6.00am on 23 May 2015, and thus replacing it earlier. There may have been further such delays after 6.00 am. There may have been a delay by the nursing staff in providing information about difficulties with the suction catheter to the doctors who arrived after the cardiac arrest call was put out. ”
    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 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to monitor humidifier operation and temperature

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Three nurses cared for Mr Entenman between 12.00pm on 22 May 2015 and 6.00am on 23 May 2015. During that time they did not observe that the humidifier had been turned off, either handovers that took place between them or each hour when they should have recorded the temperature reading from the humidifier. ”
    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 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a humidifier alarm indicating when the machine is turned off

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The humidifier machine does not have an alarm on it, to indicate when the machine has been turned off. ”
    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