Recipient

Nottingham Rehab Limited

Pin Request correction

First report 15 Jan 2025•Latest report 15 Jan 2025

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 Nottingham Rehab Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Sheila Josephine WEXLER · 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

    Sheila Wexler lived with dementia and other significant comorbidities and died at home on 17 February 2024 from bilateral pulmonary embolism. Delays in supplying equipment and the provision of defective turning equipment significantly increased her immobility, contributing to her death. The report identified ongoing concerns about delays and defective equipment supplied by NRS Healthcare, including wider risks affecting other patients.

    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 Nottingham Rehab Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide and replace medical equipment with correct, functional equipment

    Wider context from the report

    “NRS Healthcare related matters: I heard evidence of a delay in delivering some of the required equipment, which in turn meant a delay in the patient being able to make use of the equipment. The delay meant that the patient’s family, carers, and the district nursing team underwent a period of time in which they were unable to provide the patient with the optimal care required in relation to the pressure ulcer. When the TOTO turning system arrived it was defective. An urgent repair/replace request was made to NRS Healthcare, which resulted in an engineer attending the patient’s home to replace the pump on 23 January 2024. However, despite advising that they had replaced the pump with a like-for-like pump, it transpired that the replacement pump was a ‘Tri-Pos Bariatric Alternating Air Cushion’ pump. This replacement pump had none of the settings that would allow the proper and effective use of the TOTO system. In this instance, the TOTO system was required to turn the patient from one side to the other every 60 minutes. I was told in evidence that equipment issues would have added to the patients ‘pain and distress’ and the fitting of the incorrect pump meant that the patient was not being turned every 60 minutes, as required. Again, this creates the risk that those caring for the patient were precluded from providing an optimal level of care. While the presence of a pressure ulcer, in itself, did not add to the underlying risk of the patient developing a pulmonary embolism, the delayed and defective equipment provided significantly increased the patient’s immobility in the weeks prior to her death. There was evidence that immobility is a major risk factor in the development of pulmonary emboli. I heard evidence that issues with delays and defective equipment from NRS Healthcare persist to date. NRS Healthcare and NHS England related matters: I heard evidence that since being awarded the contract to provide such equipment, there had been numerous and ongoing delays and ‘problems’ in the service provided by NRS Healthcare. The evidence was such that the repeated issues and concerns had actually been placed on the Trust/Integrated Care Board’s (ICBs) risk register. While I heard that there had been some improvement, I was told that the service provided was still ‘not great’. While this particular case is the first in which I have formed the opinion that delayed and defective equipment has created a risk of future deaths, I have heard similar evidence of delayed and defective equipment issues relating to NRS Healthcare in other inquests concerning different NHS Trusts and ICBs. On that basis, I am also of the opinion, given NRS Healthcare’s operations are not confined to organisations within this coroner area, that the risks posed are likely to be more widespread and that action should be taken more widely. ”
    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 Nottingham Rehab Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delays in delivering required medical equipment

    Wider context from the report

    “NRS Healthcare related matters: I heard evidence of a delay in delivering some of the required equipment, which in turn meant a delay in the patient being able to make use of the equipment. The delay meant that the patient’s family, carers, and the district nursing team underwent a period of time in which they were unable to provide the patient with the optimal care required in relation to the pressure ulcer. When the TOTO turning system arrived it was defective. An urgent repair/replace request was made to NRS Healthcare, which resulted in an engineer attending the patient’s home to replace the pump on 23 January 2024. However, despite advising that they had replaced the pump with a like-for-like pump, it transpired that the replacement pump was a ‘Tri-Pos Bariatric Alternating Air Cushion’ pump. This replacement pump had none of the settings that would allow the proper and effective use of the TOTO system. In this instance, the TOTO system was required to turn the patient from one side to the other every 60 minutes. I was told in evidence that equipment issues would have added to the patients ‘pain and distress’ and the fitting of the incorrect pump meant that the patient was not being turned every 60 minutes, as required. Again, this creates the risk that those caring for the patient were precluded from providing an optimal level of care. While the presence of a pressure ulcer, in itself, did not add to the underlying risk of the patient developing a pulmonary embolism, the delayed and defective equipment provided significantly increased the patient’s immobility in the weeks prior to her death. There was evidence that immobility is a major risk factor in the development of pulmonary emboli. I heard evidence that issues with delays and defective equipment from NRS Healthcare persist to date. NRS Healthcare and NHS England related matters: I heard evidence that since being awarded the contract to provide such equipment, there had been numerous and ongoing delays and ‘problems’ in the service provided by NRS Healthcare. The evidence was such that the repeated issues and concerns had actually been placed on the Trust/Integrated Care Board’s (ICBs) risk register. While I heard that there had been some improvement, I was told that the service provided was still ‘not great’. While this particular case is the first in which I have formed the opinion that delayed and defective equipment has created a risk of future deaths, I have heard similar evidence of delayed and defective equipment issues relating to NRS Healthcare in other inquests concerning different NHS Trusts and ICBs. On that basis, I am also of the opinion, given NRS Healthcare’s operations are not confined to organisations within this coroner area, that the risks posed are likely to be more widespread and that action should be taken more widely. ”
    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