Stockport Medical Group

Health and care · Healthcare site

Pin Request correction

First report 3 Sep 2018•Latest report 3 Sep 2018

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
1

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
5

Described in responses

Concerns and recipient responses

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

  1. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Andrew Arthur Dickson · 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

    Andrew Arthur Dickson died on 15 February 2018, aged 30, after sustaining fatal injuries by jumping from a viaduct; the inquest recorded a conclusion of suicide. The report raised concerns that information about his suicidal thoughts, provided to the GP practice by telephone, was not incorporated into the screen seen by the doctor conducting the subsequent face-to-face consultation. It identified potential risks where information depends on clinician memory or on a patient or representative repeating it, particularly in group practices and for vulnerable or reluctant 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 Stockport Medical Group; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of the practice information system to reliably communicate telephone triage information to the subsequent face-to-face clinician

    Wider context from the report

    “Notwithstanding the obvious significance of the information provided to the practice by telephone on 12th February 2018 when an appointment with a GP was sought on the basis that Mr Dickson had been having suicidal thoughts, the evidence before the court was that whilst this information is made available to the telephone triage doctor by way of alert note, the same text is not incorporated in to the screen which a doctor subsequently undertaking a face-to-face appointment sees. This raises the following matters of concern:- 1. The safety of the computer system as currently operated appears to be prefaced on the telephone triage doctor being the same clinician who sees the patient at a subsequent face-to-face consultation, and remembering the content of the alert note despite having had to undertake a multitude of other tasks in the meantime; 2. In the alternative, the onus is likely to fall on the patient (or his / her representative or carer) to repeat information in the course of the consultation which may already be in the practice’s knowledge as a result of an earlier telephone call to an administrative member of staff, and which the patient (carer or representative) is likely to assume is already in the doctor’s possession; 3. The system as currently operated appears likely to create additional risk in a group practice (in circumstances where the telephone triage doctor may be based in a different location from the doctor undertaking a subsequent consultation), and where patients may be vulnerable or reluctant to engage with a doctor for any reason. ”
    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

    Adhere to the policy of recording reception and triage information in clinical notes pending suitable EMIS software adaptation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The partners’ discussion centred around the need to achieve a balance between the need for all pertinent clinical information to be visible in the clinical records on the one hand, and the need to avoid unnecessary or administrative entries that can clog up the notes and may potentially make it more difficult for a clinician to be able to identify relevant clinical information. We decided that it would be unreasonable and potentially unsafe to expect staff taking these calls, who are not medically trained, to decide what information is clinically relevant. It was therefore agreed that the practice should adopt a policy that all information recorded by reception staff from patients or carers’ initial calls, along with any subsequent notes made by the triage doctor, should be recorded in the clinical notes. These notes are available for clinicians to consult across all practice locations.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    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

    Have reception supervisors train staff across all three sites to use the EMIS triage template as the standard booking format.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have organised training with the reception supervisors in order to ensure that this new EMIS template is being used whenever patients are booked onto the triage list. This training is scheduled to take place over the next 4 weeks. Our reception supervisors will subsequently inform and train staff at each of our 3 sites, explaining that this is now the standard format for adding patients onto the triage list. We therefore expect that all notes will now appear on the EMIS clinical records.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    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

    Train reception supervisors to use the new EMIS triage template.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have organised training with the reception supervisors in order to ensure that this new EMIS template is being used whenever patients are booked onto the triage list. This training is scheduled to take place over the next 4 weeks. Our reception supervisors will subsequently inform and train staff at each of our 3 sites, explaining that this is now the standard format for adding patients onto the triage list. We therefore expect that all notes will now appear on the EMIS clinical records.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    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

    Record reception and triage information in patients’ clinical notes using the EMIS triage template.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The partners’ discussion centred around the need to achieve a balance between the need for all pertinent clinical information to be visible in the clinical records on the one hand, and the need to avoid unnecessary or administrative entries that can clog up the notes and may potentially make it more difficult for a clinician to be able to identify relevant clinical information. We decided that it would be unreasonable and potentially unsafe to expect staff taking these calls, who are not medically trained, to decide what information is clinically relevant. It was therefore agreed that the practice should adopt a policy that all information recorded by reception staff from patients or carers’ initial calls, along with any subsequent notes made by the triage doctor, should be recorded in the clinical notes. These notes are available for clinicians to consult across all practice locations.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 1 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    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

    Request EMIS software changes to automate transfer of triage information into clinical notes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Our practice currently uses the EMIS Web clinical system which is used nationally. This system does not currently have the means to automatically pull information across from triage or appointment slots into the clinical notes. We consider that it would be preferable for this to be automated, removing the manual part of the process outlined above. We have written to EMIS on 21st September 2018 (reference ECR 10381933) requesting this addition to their software. We have highlighted why there is a need for this and the potential implications of an omission of this software capability, as clearly outlined in your letter.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    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

    Automating transfer of triage information into clinical notes depends on EMIS adding the required software capability.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Our practice currently uses the EMIS Web clinical system which is used nationally. This system does not currently have the means to automatically pull information across from triage or appointment slots into the clinical notes. We consider that it would be preferable for this to be automated, removing the manual part of the process outlined above. We have written to EMIS on 21st September 2018 (reference ECR 10381933) requesting this addition to their software. We have highlighted why there is a need for this and the potential implications of an omission of this software capability, as clearly outlined in your letter.”

    Source location

    2018-0296-Response-by-Stockport-Medical-Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 19 January 2019

    Open published response
Back to top

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