Recipient

Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust

First report 9 May 2021•Latest report 9 May 2021

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Health and care · NHS trust. 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 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Liverpool and the Wirral

    AI-generated summary

    Eva Hayden · 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

    Eva Hayden, aged four, developed neutropenia following an illness and later became seriously unwell with fever-like symptoms. She collapsed on 10 January 2020 and died in the emergency department on 11 January 2020; the inquest found sepsis and bone marrow hypoplasia. Concerns included missed follow-up of her neutropenia, inadequate communication between hospitals, and insufficient communication with her parents about infection risks.

    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 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to communicate treatment plans and condition-related risks to patients and confirm their understanding

    Wider context from the report

    “a) When investigating, diagnosing or treating a patient’s presentation it seems reasonable that there should be good communication between clinician and patient with regard to the treatment plan. Understanding of the patient should be confirmed with regard to any precautions or risks arising from the condition. In this matter, Eva’s parents had no knowledge of the pancytopenia or neutropenia under investigation and the risks of infection for Eva – such that this was not explained to the staff in the Emergency department at Alder Hey on 8th January 2020. Clinical practice should have prevented this eventuality. ”
    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 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of clinical communication between Trusts about unresolved investigations

    Wider context from the report

    “b) When Eva missed the appointment at Ormskirk Hospital on the 25th November 2019 for her blood tests – there was no follow up by the hospital as there was an “assumption” that a follow-up orthopaedic appointment for cellulitis would investigate her neutropenia. The assumption was wrong and there was no clinical communication between the Trusts, which would have clarified that investigation of neutropenia had ceased without resolution. The onus for investigations cannot be on a four year old or her parents who were unaware of the potentially fatal implications. ”
    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 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to follow up missed appointments for investigation of neutropenia

    Wider context from the report

    “b) When Eva missed the appointment at Ormskirk Hospital on the 25th November 2019 for her blood tests – there was no follow up by the hospital as there was an “assumption” that a follow-up orthopaedic appointment for cellulitis would investigate her neutropenia. The assumption was wrong and there was no clinical communication between the Trusts, which would have clarified that investigation of neutropenia had ceased without resolution. The onus for investigations cannot be on a four year old or her parents who were unaware of the potentially fatal implications. ”
    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