Recipient

Oakside Surgery

First report 8 Apr 2014•Latest report 8 Apr 2014

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Health and care · Healthcare site. 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
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
4

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
6

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.

100%published responses found
6stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Oakside Surgery linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Plymouth, Torbay and South Devon

    AI-generated summary

    Leslie Edmund Harding (Lez) · 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

    Leslie Edmund Harding had a history of multiple sclerosis and recurrent pulmonary emboli, and died after collapsing on 28 September 2013. The report raised concerns about the lack of action after he was assessed with chest pain and suspected pulmonary embolus, gaps in anticoagulation prescribing and follow-up, insufficient efforts to address alleged non-compliance, and the absence of a prompt significant events review.

    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 Oakside Surgery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure prompt treatment of suspected life-threatening conditions

    Wider context from the report

    “1. ████████ took no action during the period from 18 – 28 September 2013. Patients with a suspected life-threatening condition (Pulmonary Embolus) must be promptly treated. The system for ensuring that the treatment is provided must be robust. That is particularly the case where it is already known that the patient suffers from an underlying condition that makes him prone to the particular life-threatening event. ”
    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 Oakside Surgery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to conduct timely significant-events review of a death

    Wider context from the report

    “4. I was advised that this death had not yet been reviewed in a significant events meeting. In my view, that should have taken place forthwith after Lez’s death. You may wish to convene a significant events ”
    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 Oakside Surgery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure continuity of required anticoagulation medication

    Wider context from the report

    “3. At Inquest, I gained the impression that Lez was felt to be non-compliant with his anti-coagulation regime. It was plain from the prescription history that there were repeated gaps in the provision of medication that Lez required. There seemed, however, in my view, to have been little effort given to addressing the reasons why, or indeed if, Lez actually was non-compliant with his medication. By way of illustration, I was not shown a letter from the Surgery to Lez bringing to his attention that he had failed to collect his monthly supply of Clexane and warning him of the risks of failing to maintain the treatment regime. I heard evidence at Inquest that Lez could be an awkward patient. In my view, of itself, that is insufficient reason not to make every reasonable effort to ensure that a patient complies with an identified need for lifelong anti-coagulation. ”
    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 Oakside Surgery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to address suspected non-compliance with lifelong anticoagulation

    Wider context from the report

    “3. At Inquest, I gained the impression that Lez was felt to be non-compliant with his anti-coagulation regime. It was plain from the prescription history that there were repeated gaps in the provision of medication that Lez required. There seemed, however, in my view, to have been little effort given to addressing the reasons why, or indeed if, Lez actually was non-compliant with his medication. By way of illustration, I was not shown a letter from the Surgery to Lez bringing to his attention that he had failed to collect his monthly supply of Clexane and warning him of the risks of failing to maintain the treatment regime. I heard evidence at Inquest that Lez could be an awkward patient. In my view, of itself, that is insufficient reason not to make every reasonable effort to ensure that a patient complies with an identified need for lifelong anti-coagulation. ”
    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 Oakside Surgery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to check for omissions in anticoagulation treatment for other patients

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Your practice will have a number of other patients in receipt of anti-coagulation treatment following recurrent Pulmonary Embolii. Given the omission that appears to have occurred here, you need to ensure that no other omissions have happened with any of the other patients ”
    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

    Review advice given when patients begin anticoagulation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3) As a result of this situation, I have reviewed the advice given to people when they first begin anti-coagulation and as a practice we are in the process of composing a letter informing people of the risks of non-concordance with medication.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    Discuss the entire case at the Practice’s September 2014 significant event analysis meeting.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “4) I am relatively new to the Practice but my colleagues were able to produce evidence that the situation had been reviewed formally on a number of occasions and now we have your further report I have scheduled a further discussion of the entire case at the next significant event analysis meeting in the Practice which will take place in September 2014.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    Extend the anticoagulation review to patients receiving low-molecular-weight heparin and novel oral anticoagulants.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have also decided to extend this review to patients receiving low molecular rate heparin and novel oral anti-coagulants.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    Audit all patients receiving acute or recurrent pulmonary-embolism treatment for similar omissions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2) Having reviewed this case, I am undertaking an audit of all people receiving treatment for pulmonary emboli whether acute or recurrent to ensure that no similar omissions have occurred.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    Compose a letter informing patients of the risks of non-concordance with medication.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “3) As a result of this situation, I have reviewed the advice given to people when they first begin anti-coagulation and as a practice we are in the process of composing a letter informing people of the risks of non-concordance with medication.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    A patient with mental capacity could refuse hospital admission and treatment despite the risk of later harm.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I did note that Mr Harding was judged to have mental capacity and that he appeared to have made an informed decision in the days leading up to the 18th September 2013 on more than one occasion not to be then admitted to hospital and received what I can consider to be the appropriate treatment. He appears to have made this decision in the knowledge that the outcome could have been fatal.”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    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

    Pulmonary embolism should not be treated in the community without hospital investigations because anticoagulation could cause equally serious harm.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I also feel that it would have been inappropriate for ████████ to have treated Mr Harding as if he had a pulmonary embolism within the community without appropriately investigating it with investigations which were only available within a hospital setting. If he had done so, this would”

    Source location

    2014-0169-Response-by-Oakside-Surgery
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 April 2014

    Open published response
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

100%
100%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
17%33%50%
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