Recipient

Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership

Pin Request correction

First report 22 Dec 2022•Latest report 22 Dec 2022

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Company limited by guarantee. 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 Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Manchester City

    AI-generated summary

    Name not published · 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

    The deceased suffered serious traumatic injuries in an accidental fall in Pakistan, including flail chest and a subdural haemorrhage that were not initially diagnosed, and later deteriorated during her flight to the United Kingdom. She was admitted to hospital in Manchester, but despite medical management her condition deteriorated and she died on 26 July 2019. The substantive concerns included inconsistent oxygen prescribing and documentation, wider risks from over- or under-oxygenation, and the absence of guidance addressing fitness to fly after trauma with respiratory implications.

    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 Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of guidance on respiratory fitness to fly after trauma

    Wider context from the report

    “4. The BTS have already issued guidance for passengers travelling with respiratory conditions; namely, the BTS Clinical Statement on air travel for passengers with respiratory disease (https://thorax.bmj.com/content/77/4/329). However, this guidance does not cover trauma, as in this case. Whether or not guidance would be appropriate to issue to determine whether or not a person was fit to fly from a respiratory perspective in the context of the trauma – Consideration should be given to formulating such guidance which can then be circulated more widely including to the airline industry ”
    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 Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a recurrent national audit of emergency oxygen

    Wider context from the report

    “1. That the HQIP should consider undertaking in liaison with the BTS a further review and audit in relation to delivering a recurrent national audit of emergency oxygen. This update will also be able to use learning from recent clinical practice (including the Covid pandemic) and the developments in treatment. ”
    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