Recipient

Physio-Control UK Sales Ltd

Pin Request correction

First report 12 Mar 2020•Latest report 12 Mar 2020

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · 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
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
1

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.

100%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Physio-Control UK Sales Ltd linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Mitica Marin · 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

    Mitica Marin, aged 35, was found unresponsive at home on 11 April 2019 and died in hospital after prolonged resuscitation attempts. The cause of death was unascertained. The LAS investigation identified a four-minute delay in delivering the first defibrillator shock while Mr Marin was in a shockable rhythm, associated with the defibrillator being used in manual rather than automatic mode.

    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 Physio-Control UK Sales Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to review the defibrillator during resuscitation

    Wider context from the report

    “The LAS serious incident investigation identified a 4-minute delay between LP15 defibrillator pads being placed on Mr Marin’s chest and the administration of the first shock. During this period Mr Marin’s heart was in a shockable rhythm. Paramedic A accepted that they had not reviewed the defibrillator as they were distracted by events. Paramedic A did not activate the defibrillator in “automatic” mode. Had this setting been applied, any shockable rhythm would have been detected and an alert would have prompted the paramedic to shock to the patient. This is not an isolated incident, the LAS conceded that it had undertaken a review of similar cases of delayed defibrillation. The review found that a factor was that the LP15 defibrillator model, defaults to manual mode requiring the user to switch to automatic mode before use. 2 studies cited by the LAS indicated that every minute a patient is delayed effective resuscitation; their prospects of survival diminishes by between 10-22%. The LAS have introduced remedial measures to prevent such actions occurring, incorporating; training on the use of the LP15, labelling on units and the issuing of revised guidance. If the LP15 defaulted to automatic mode or on start-up required, the choice of manual or automatic mode it is possible that such delays could be avoided. I understand that procurement decisions regarding the future supply of defibrillators are imminent. ”
    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 Physio-Control UK Sales Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    LP15 defibrillator defaulting to manual mode

    Wider context from the report

    “The LAS serious incident investigation identified a 4-minute delay between LP15 defibrillator pads being placed on Mr Marin’s chest and the administration of the first shock. During this period Mr Marin’s heart was in a shockable rhythm. Paramedic A accepted that they had not reviewed the defibrillator as they were distracted by events. Paramedic A did not activate the defibrillator in “automatic” mode. Had this setting been applied, any shockable rhythm would have been detected and an alert would have prompted the paramedic to shock to the patient. This is not an isolated incident, the LAS conceded that it had undertaken a review of similar cases of delayed defibrillation. The review found that a factor was that the LP15 defibrillator model, defaults to manual mode requiring the user to switch to automatic mode before use. 2 studies cited by the LAS indicated that every minute a patient is delayed effective resuscitation; their prospects of survival diminishes by between 10-22%. The LAS have introduced remedial measures to prevent such actions occurring, incorporating; training on the use of the LP15, labelling on units and the issuing of revised guidance. If the LP15 defaulted to automatic mode or on start-up required, the choice of manual or automatic mode it is possible that such delays could be avoided. I understand that procurement decisions regarding the future supply of defibrillators are imminent. ”
    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 Physio-Control UK Sales Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to activate the LP15 defibrillator in automatic mode

    Wider context from the report

    “The LAS serious incident investigation identified a 4-minute delay between LP15 defibrillator pads being placed on Mr Marin’s chest and the administration of the first shock. During this period Mr Marin’s heart was in a shockable rhythm. Paramedic A accepted that they had not reviewed the defibrillator as they were distracted by events. Paramedic A did not activate the defibrillator in “automatic” mode. Had this setting been applied, any shockable rhythm would have been detected and an alert would have prompted the paramedic to shock to the patient. This is not an isolated incident, the LAS conceded that it had undertaken a review of similar cases of delayed defibrillation. The review found that a factor was that the LP15 defibrillator model, defaults to manual mode requiring the user to switch to automatic mode before use. 2 studies cited by the LAS indicated that every minute a patient is delayed effective resuscitation; their prospects of survival diminishes by between 10-22%. The LAS have introduced remedial measures to prevent such actions occurring, incorporating; training on the use of the LP15, labelling on units and the issuing of revised guidance. If the LP15 defaulted to automatic mode or on start-up required, the choice of manual or automatic mode it is possible that such delays could be avoided. I understand that procurement decisions regarding the future supply of defibrillators are imminent. ”
    Open source report

    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

    The concerns inaccurately reflect LP15 capabilities because it can be configured to power on in either automatic or manual defibrillation mode.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “After consultation with the manufacturer of the LP15 device, I can advise that the LP15 monitor/defibrillator is designed with the ability to be configured to power on in either automatic or manual defibrillation mode based on the clinical protocols of the health system. Accordingly, I respectfully submit that the Coroner’s Concerns listed at Section 5 of the Report do not accurately reflect the capabilities of the LP15 device.”

    Source location

    2020-0066-Response-from-Stryker-Corporation-Physio-Control-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 March 2020

    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

    Existing LP15 configuration capability is considered sufficient, so no action is proposed in relation to the report.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Due to the existing capability of the LP15 to be configured to power on in either automatic or manual defibrillation mode, Stryker does not propose to take any action in relation to the Report.”

    Source location

    2020-0066-Response-from-Stryker-Corporation-Physio-Control-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 March 2020

    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
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