2 Jun 2024 Sewa Kaur Chaddha · Prevention of Future Deaths report Berkshire
View report summary
Concerns raised 2 Failure to adequately differentiate dosset boxes for elderly or cognitively impaired patients living at the same address View source Lack of disseminated guidance for pharmacists issuing medication to patients with cognitive impairments View source
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Sewa Kaur Chaddha · 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
Sewa Kaur Chaddha was found collapsed at home after taking her husband’s medication instead of her own for several days, including diabetes medication. She died in hospital from hyponatraemia caused by treatment for hypoglycaemia resulting from the accidental ingestion of hypoglycaemic medication. Concerns included the identical appearance of the couple’s dosset boxes, small patient-name labels, and the absence or poor dissemination of guidance for pharmacists supplying medication to people with cognitive impairment.
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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to adequately differentiate dosset boxes for elderly or cognitively impaired patients living at the same address
Wider context from the report “1) The medications were provided to the couple by the local pharmacy, then known as Lloyds Pharmacy, in separate dosset boxes. Mrs Chaddha’s medications were provided on a weekly basis. Mr Chaddha’s were provided on a monthly basis.
(2) Both patients were elderly and had cognitive impairment.
(3) The two patients’ dosset boxes were identical to each other except for a small pharmacist’s label with small type with the relevant patient’s name.
(4) Mrs Chaddha used one of Mr Chaddha’s dosset boxes, rather than her own, for several days.
(5) Evidence was given at the inquest that there was no guidance or policy in place for Pharmacists to follow when issuing medication to patients with cognitive impairments, or if there was, it was not well disseminated among the pharmacist population.
(6) Evidence was given at the inquest that dosset boxes of different colours or labels with different colours were not routinely given to elderly or cognitively impaired patients living at the same address.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of disseminated guidance for pharmacists issuing medication to patients with cognitive impairments
Wider context from the report “1) The medications were provided to the couple by the local pharmacy, then known as Lloyds Pharmacy, in separate dosset boxes. Mrs Chaddha’s medications were provided on a weekly basis. Mr Chaddha’s were provided on a monthly basis.
(2) Both patients were elderly and had cognitive impairment.
(3) The two patients’ dosset boxes were identical to each other except for a small pharmacist’s label with small type with the relevant patient’s name.
(4) Mrs Chaddha used one of Mr Chaddha’s dosset boxes, rather than her own, for several days.
(5) Evidence was given at the inquest that there was no guidance or policy in place for Pharmacists to follow when issuing medication to patients with cognitive impairments , or if there was, it was not well disseminated among the pharmacist population.
(6) Evidence was given at the inquest that dosset boxes of different colours or labels with different colours were not routinely given to elderly or cognitively impaired patients living at the same address.
” 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 Inform NHS England’s pharmacy team about the case and request consideration of changes to the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework.
Verbatim wording from the response “We recognise that guidance documents alone are often insufficient. Lasting and effective change requires embedding these guidelines within contracts and regulations.
We will therefore inform NHS England’s pharmacy team of this case and request that they consider potential changes to the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework.” Source location Response from Berkshire Integrated Care Board
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 Different dosette or label colours are not currently available because legal labelling requirements limit community pharmacy options.
Verbatim wording from the response “Dosette boxes are not always suitable or the only solution for supporting a patient in taking their medication. Although various types of dosette boxes are available for purchase by the public, there are only a limited number used within community pharmacy due to the requirement that dosettes used must enable fulfilment of the legal labelling requirements. These are not currently available in different colours or label colours.” Source location Response from Berkshire Integrated Care Board
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 Community pharmacies are independent contractors under a national framework, limiting the ICB’s direct influence over their processes.
Verbatim wording from the response “I am replying as the Chief Pharmacist for NHS Frimley, responsible for medicines optimisation and pharmacy across our system. While we recognise our duty to address the concerns raised, it is important to note that community pharmacies and other healthcare professionals operate as independent contractors under a national framework or contract, limiting our direct influence over their processes.” Source location Response from Berkshire Integrated Care Board
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 Changes to the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework fall to NHS England’s pharmacy team to consider.
Verbatim wording from the response “We recognise that guidance documents alone are often insufficient. Lasting and effective change requires embedding these guidelines within contracts and regulations.
We will therefore inform NHS England’s pharmacy team of this case and request that they consider potential changes to the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework.” Source location Response from NHS Frimley ICB
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 There is no single national policy, but existing guidance addresses person-centred medication support for patients with cognitive impairments.
Verbatim wording from the response “5. Evidence was given at the inquest that there was no guidance or policy in place for pharmacists to follow when issuing medication to patients with cognitive impairments, or if there was, it was not well disseminated among the pharmacist population.” Source location Response from NHS Frimley ICB
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 Community pharmacies operate as independent contractors under national contracts, limiting direct influence over their processes.
Verbatim wording from the response “I am replying as the Chief Pharmacist for NHS Frimley, responsible for medicines optimisation and pharmacy across our system. While we recognise our duty to address the concerns raised, it is important to note that community pharmacies and other healthcare professionals operate as independent contractors under a national framework or contract, limiting our direct influence over their processes.” Source location Response from NHS Frimley ICB
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 Different dosette or label colours are not currently available because community-pharmacy dosettes must meet legal labelling requirements.
Verbatim wording from the response “Dosette boxes are not always or the only solution for supporting a patient in taking their medication. Although various types of dosette boxes are available for purchase by the public, there are only a limited number used within community pharmacy due to the requirement that dosettes used must enable fulfilment of the legal labelling requirements. These are not currently available in different colours or label colours.” Source location Response from NHS Frimley ICB
Open published response
Concerns raised 12 Failure to ensure review of correspondence from TalkPlus View source Lack of guidance on thresholds for referral to secondary mental health services View source Failure to undertake mental health assessment and identify need for further or secondary mental health support View source Failure to document warnings about Mirtazepine side-effects and increased suicidal ideation risk View source Failure to confirm electronic letters are read and acted upon View source Prescribing of Mirtazepine without sufficient mental health prescribing competence View source Lack of ongoing mental health training for GPs View source Failure to offer face-to-face consultation or arrange follow-up View source Failure to ask about or document suicidal ideation and self-harm View source Failure to investigate and review deaths for learning and implementation of necessary changes View source Lack of prescribing policy for Mirtazapine, antidepressants and anxiolytics View source Failure to seek permission to involve partners and family in ongoing care View source See 9 more concerns
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
Matthew John Evans · 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
Matthew John Evans was a 47-year-old man who developed insomnia, anxiety and depression during the third COVID-19 lockdown and died on 16 June 2021 after ending his life. The principal concerns related to the GP’s lack of mental-health assessment, suicide-risk assessment, follow-up and consideration of referral; the general practice’s prescribing, communication and clinical-governance arrangements; and TalkPlus’s lack of clear guidance on referral to secondary mental-health services.
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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to ensure review of correspondence from TalkPlus
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of guidance on thresholds for referral to secondary mental health services
Wider context from the report “3. The actions of TalkPlus
There does not appear to be robust guidance or a policy as to the threshold necessary to refer a patient to secondary mental health services in Matthew’s circumstances where his mental health had deteriorated as the sessions progressed and he had began to indicate suicidal ideation and self-harm on a background of no previous mental health difficulties.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to undertake mental health assessment and identify need for further or secondary mental health support
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to document warnings about Mirtazepine side-effects and increased suicidal ideation risk
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to confirm electronic letters are read and acted upon
Wider context from the report “2. The actions of the General Practice
No policy was provided to assist GP’s with prescribing of Mirtazapine and antidepressants and anxiolytics in general practice. There is no confirmation electronic letters have been signed as read and acted upon by the relevant GP. No evidence was provided with regard to ongoing training in mental health for GP’s. Matthew’s death was not investigated or reviewed by the GP practice with the consequence no learning points have been considered or, if necessary, changes implemented, giving rise to concern over the lack of robust clinical governance procedure within the practice.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Prescribing of Mirtazepine without sufficient mental health prescribing competence
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of ongoing mental health training for GPs
Wider context from the report “2. The actions of the General Practice
No policy was provided to assist GP’s with prescribing of Mirtazapine and antidepressants and anxiolytics in general practice. There is no confirmation electronic letters have been signed as read and acted upon by the relevant GP. No evidence was provided with regard to ongoing training in mental health for GP’s. Matthew’s death was not investigated or reviewed by the GP practice with the consequence no learning points have been considered or, if necessary, changes implemented, giving rise to concern over the lack of robust clinical governance procedure within the practice.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to offer face-to-face consultation or arrange follow-up
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to ask about or document suicidal ideation and self-harm
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to investigate and review deaths for learning and implementation of necessary changes
Wider context from the report “2. The actions of the General Practice
No policy was provided to assist GP’s with prescribing of Mirtazapine and antidepressants and anxiolytics in general practice. There is no confirmation electronic letters have been signed as read and acted upon by the relevant GP. No evidence was provided with regard to ongoing training in mental health for GP’s. Matthew’s death was not investigated or reviewed by the GP practice with the consequence no learning points have been considered or, if necessary, changes implemented, giving rise to concern over the lack of robust clinical governance procedure within the practice.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of prescribing policy for Mirtazapine, antidepressants and anxiolytics
Wider context from the report “2. The actions of the General Practice
No policy was provided to assist GP’s with prescribing of Mirtazapine and antidepressants and anxiolytics in general practice. There is no confirmation electronic letters have been signed as read and acted upon by the relevant GP. No evidence was provided with regard to ongoing training in mental health for GP’s. Matthew’s death was not investigated or reviewed by the GP practice with the consequence no learning points have been considered or, if necessary, changes implemented, giving rise to concern over the lack of robust clinical governance procedure within the practice.
” 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 NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to seek permission to involve partners and family in ongoing care
Wider context from the report “1. The actions of the General Practitioner
The GP was not sufficiently proactive with multiple lost opportunities to provide better care and support for Matthew. The GP did not undertake a mental health assessment to assess the severity of Matthew’s difficulties and to ascertain whether further support or referral to secondary mental health care were indicated in any of the four telephone consultations. He did not ask or document at any time if Matthew had any suicidal ideation or acts of self-harm. The GP did not offer a face-to-face consultation or arrange a follow up appointment. The GP declined to prescribe Zopiclone and whilst he referred Matthew to the benefits of Melatonin he did not offer a prescription. He prescribed Mirtazepine having not done so before for someone in Matthew’s position on a background of having no post graduate qualifications in mental health. Furthermore, he did not document any warning of the possible side-effects of this drug including the possible increased risk of suicidal ideation with commencing the drug. It is unclear whether the GP had read the letters from TalkPlus. He did not ask permission as to whether it was possible to inform or involve Matthew’s partner and family in his on-going care.
” Open source report
Pin
Request correction
Addressed to NHS North East Hampshire and Farnham Clinical Commissioning Group, now represented here by NHS Frimley Integrated Care Board.
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations