Concerns raised 4 Failure to refer dosage-clarification correspondence to a clinician View source Failure to refer medication-change correspondence to a clinician for consideration View source Failure to give the prescribing GP express instructions to amend Brivaracetam prescriptions after dosage changes View source Failure to maintain a reliable written basis for Brivaracetam dosage administration View source See 1 more concern
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Joshua Ethan BURGESS · 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
Joshua Ethan Burgess, who had epilepsy and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, died at home on 19 November 2022 after vomiting and aspirating during an epileptic seizure. The report identifies concerns about communication and prescribing processes for Brivaracetam, including failures to update the prescription, medication being withheld for several days, and a subsequent increase to 10ml twice daily despite information that 4ml twice daily was appropriate.
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 Godfrey Care; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to refer dosage-clarification correspondence to a clinician
Wider context from the report “1. The Neurology department of the Royal Stoke University Hospital operated a system whereby it did not instruct the prescribing GP to amend the prescription of Brivaracetam when changes to dosage had been agreed with Mr Burgess’ mother. The evidence from the Consultant Neurologist was that an assumption was made that when changes to medication had been discussed and agreed that Mr Burgess’ mother would attend the GP surgery to discuss the changes in medication. The same witness gave evidence that it was assumed a pharmacist within the GP surgery would read the correspondence from the neurology department and make the necessary changes to prescriptions without express instructions to do so.
2. The “workflow” within the Brook Medical Centre was such that letters sent from the Neurology department discussing changes in medication (albeit not containing a request to amend the prescription) were processed by support staff and not referred to a clinician to consider and so no changes were made to the prescription.
3. The letter of 27 July 2022 from the Neurology department to Brook Medical Centre seeking clarification as to the correct dosage of Brivaracetam was processed by support staff and a summary medications sent without referral to a clinician .
4. Godfrey Care were informed by Mr Burgess’ mother and the Neurology department of Royal Stoke University that the appropriate dose of Brivaracetam was 4ml twice daily. Medication was withheld between 22-26 July 2022 due to the information not being in writing from the prescriber, however the evidence at inquest was that 10ml twice daily was commenced on 26 July 2022 following a call to the 111 service.
” 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 Godfrey Care; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to refer medication-change correspondence to a clinician for consideration
Wider context from the report “1. The Neurology department of the Royal Stoke University Hospital operated a system whereby it did not instruct the prescribing GP to amend the prescription of Brivaracetam when changes to dosage had been agreed with Mr Burgess’ mother. The evidence from the Consultant Neurologist was that an assumption was made that when changes to medication had been discussed and agreed that Mr Burgess’ mother would attend the GP surgery to discuss the changes in medication. The same witness gave evidence that it was assumed a pharmacist within the GP surgery would read the correspondence from the neurology department and make the necessary changes to prescriptions without express instructions to do so.
2. The “workflow” within the Brook Medical Centre was such that letters sent from the Neurology department discussing changes in medication (albeit not containing a request to amend the prescription) were processed by support staff and not referred to a clinician to consider and so no changes were made to the prescription .
3. The letter of 27 July 2022 from the Neurology department to Brook Medical Centre seeking clarification as to the correct dosage of Brivaracetam was processed by support staff and a summary medications sent without referral to a clinician.
4. Godfrey Care were informed by Mr Burgess’ mother and the Neurology department of Royal Stoke University that the appropriate dose of Brivaracetam was 4ml twice daily. Medication was withheld between 22-26 July 2022 due to the information not being in writing from the prescriber, however the evidence at inquest was that 10ml twice daily was commenced on 26 July 2022 following a call to the 111 service.
” 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 Godfrey Care; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to give the prescribing GP express instructions to amend Brivaracetam prescriptions after dosage changes
Wider context from the report “1. The Neurology department of the Royal Stoke University Hospital operated a system whereby it did not instruct the prescribing GP to amend the prescription of Brivaracetam when changes to dosage had been agreed with Mr Burgess’ mother . The evidence from the Consultant Neurologist was that an assumption was made that when changes to medication had been discussed and agreed that Mr Burgess’ mother would attend the GP surgery to discuss the changes in medication. The same witness gave evidence that it was assumed a pharmacist within the GP surgery would read the correspondence from the neurology department and make the necessary changes to prescriptions without express instructions to do so .
2. The “workflow” within the Brook Medical Centre was such that letters sent from the Neurology department discussing changes in medication (albeit not containing a request to amend the prescription) were processed by support staff and not referred to a clinician to consider and so no changes were made to the prescription.
3. The letter of 27 July 2022 from the Neurology department to Brook Medical Centre seeking clarification as to the correct dosage of Brivaracetam was processed by support staff and a summary medications sent without referral to a clinician.
4. Godfrey Care were informed by Mr Burgess’ mother and the Neurology department of Royal Stoke University that the appropriate dose of Brivaracetam was 4ml twice daily. Medication was withheld between 22-26 July 2022 due to the information not being in writing from the prescriber, however the evidence at inquest was that 10ml twice daily was commenced on 26 July 2022 following a call to the 111 service.
” 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 Godfrey Care; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to maintain a reliable written basis for Brivaracetam dosage administration
Wider context from the report “1. The Neurology department of the Royal Stoke University Hospital operated a system whereby it did not instruct the prescribing GP to amend the prescription of Brivaracetam when changes to dosage had been agreed with Mr Burgess’ mother. The evidence from the Consultant Neurologist was that an assumption was made that when changes to medication had been discussed and agreed that Mr Burgess’ mother would attend the GP surgery to discuss the changes in medication. The same witness gave evidence that it was assumed a pharmacist within the GP surgery would read the correspondence from the neurology department and make the necessary changes to prescriptions without express instructions to do so.
2. The “workflow” within the Brook Medical Centre was such that letters sent from the Neurology department discussing changes in medication (albeit not containing a request to amend the prescription) were processed by support staff and not referred to a clinician to consider and so no changes were made to the prescription.
3. The letter of 27 July 2022 from the Neurology department to Brook Medical Centre seeking clarification as to the correct dosage of Brivaracetam was processed by support staff and a summary medications sent without referral to a clinician.
4. Godfrey Care were informed by Mr Burgess’ mother and the Neurology department of Royal Stoke University that the appropriate dose of Brivaracetam was 4ml twice daily. Medication was withheld between 22-26 July 2022 due to the information not being in writing from the prescriber , however the evidence at inquest was that 10ml twice daily was commenced on 26 July 2022 following a call to the 111 service .
” 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 Update weekly and monthly managers’ medication audits to verify written authorisation, dosage changes and timely receipt of replacement prescriptions.
Verbatim wording from the response “• Run through the reviewed managers monthly medication audit to ensure expectations are clear.” Source location Response from Godfrey Care
Open published response
×
Source evidence
How this respondent action was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation Implement a local medication policy covering medication receipt, transcription, altered labels, missed doses, written prescribing confirmation and triangulation between prescribers.
Verbatim wording from the response “Reviewed Policies and Procedures
The following actions will be implemented by 1st April 2024.” Source location Response from Godfrey Care
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 Review internal policies and procedures against the coroner’s concerns and identify necessary changes.
Verbatim wording from the response “Godfrey Care Response
We intend to review our internal policies and procedures considering the coroners concerns and identify where changes need to be made. Below, we respond to the coroner’s areas of concern, setting out what we have already done, what we are doing now, and what we intend to do in the future.” Source location Response from Godfrey Care
Open published response
×
Source evidence
How this respondent action was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation Update staff medication competency assessments to test clarification of unclear directions, MAR-label discrepancies and verbal medication changes.
Verbatim wording from the response “3 The Staff Medication Competency Assessment has been reviewed and now includes the following questions.” Source location Response from Godfrey Care
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