Recipient

The Priory Hospital Altrincham

First report 9 Oct 2015•Latest report 9 Oct 2015

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
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 The Priory Hospital Altrincham linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    Suzanne Samantha Greenwood · 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

    Suzanne Samantha Greenwood died at Haslam Park, Bolton, on 23 December 2014 after being found collapsed and unresponsive with a ligature around her neck; she had also taken Zopiclone and alcohol. The principal concerns were the absence of contact after she failed to attend appointments, her not being discharged or reported to her General Practitioner, and the lack of systems and timescales for managing missed appointments and notifying other healthcare professionals.

    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 The Priory Hospital Altrincham; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to contact patients after missed appointments

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. Mrs Greenwood had not been seen by ████████ at the Priory Hospital, Altrincham after her last review on the 21st November 2013 prior to her death on the 23rd December 2014. She had failed to attend appointments in January 2014 but there had been no contact with her, either by telephone or letter, following her failure to attend the appointment on the 16th January 2014. ii. Mrs Greenwood had not been discharged by ████████ following her failure to attend her appointment on the 16th January 2014 and before her death on the 23rd December 2014 but there had been no contact with her for a period exceeding 11 months. iii. ████████ had not made any contact with the General Practitioner to confirm Mrs Greenwood’s failure to attend her appointments in January 2014 and that she had not been seen after the 21st November 2013, which is a particular concern when an Advanced Nurse Practitioner reduced the medication initially prescribed by ████████ which she had the authority to reduce, in circumstances where ████████ had not seen Mrs Greenwood since the 21st November 2013. iv. There are no systems, either in ████████ private practice or in the Priory Hospital, Altrincham to contact patients following a failure to attend appointments and to consider the discharge of patients when a patient repeatedly fails to attend appointments over a period of time. There are no timescales with regard to the discharge of patients and no system to contact General Practitioners or other health professionals in relation to the failure to attend appointments, particularly in circumstances where other health professionals are likely to continue to treat patients after the missed appointments, including changes in medication. The importance of discharge within a reasonable period after a failure to attend appointments is important to enable other health professionals involved in continuing care to be aware of the non-attendance at appointments and the discharge. The fact that there has been no reported failure to attend appointments and no reported discharge would be misleading to other health professionals involved in continuing care, particularly when a patient has not been seen for a period in excess of 12 months and that information would not be available to other health professionals in the absence of information from the Hospital. There is a need for health professionals involved in the continuing care of a patient to be kept informed as to the treatment or non-treatment of the patient at a hospital when considering further treatment in the community. 2. I request you to consider the above concerns and for both ████████ and The Priory Hospital, Altrincham to carry out a review with regard to the following. i. The systems procedures, policies and protocols in relation to contact with patients who fail to attend appointments. ii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments and to consider a final letter to the patient indicating that the patient will be discharged unless there is either contact or an appointment within a defined period. iii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to the discharge of patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments with notification to General Practitioners or other health professionals of the patient’s failure to attend appointments and their discharge from hospital. The review should consider timescales in relation to discharge when a patient has failed to attend appointments for a specific period of time. iv. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues. ”
    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 The Priory Hospital Altrincham; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to discharge patients after repeated missed appointments within defined timescales

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. Mrs Greenwood had not been seen by ████████ at the Priory Hospital, Altrincham after her last review on the 21st November 2013 prior to her death on the 23rd December 2014. She had failed to attend appointments in January 2014 but there had been no contact with her, either by telephone or letter, following her failure to attend the appointment on the 16th January 2014. ii. Mrs Greenwood had not been discharged by ████████ following her failure to attend her appointment on the 16th January 2014 and before her death on the 23rd December 2014 but there had been no contact with her for a period exceeding 11 months. iii. ████████ had not made any contact with the General Practitioner to confirm Mrs Greenwood’s failure to attend her appointments in January 2014 and that she had not been seen after the 21st November 2013, which is a particular concern when an Advanced Nurse Practitioner reduced the medication initially prescribed by ████████ which she had the authority to reduce, in circumstances where ████████ had not seen Mrs Greenwood since the 21st November 2013. iv. There are no systems, either in ████████ private practice or in the Priory Hospital, Altrincham to contact patients following a failure to attend appointments and to consider the discharge of patients when a patient repeatedly fails to attend appointments over a period of time. There are no timescales with regard to the discharge of patients and no system to contact General Practitioners or other health professionals in relation to the failure to attend appointments, particularly in circumstances where other health professionals are likely to continue to treat patients after the missed appointments, including changes in medication. The importance of discharge within a reasonable period after a failure to attend appointments is important to enable other health professionals involved in continuing care to be aware of the non-attendance at appointments and the discharge. The fact that there has been no reported failure to attend appointments and no reported discharge would be misleading to other health professionals involved in continuing care, particularly when a patient has not been seen for a period in excess of 12 months and that information would not be available to other health professionals in the absence of information from the Hospital. There is a need for health professionals involved in the continuing care of a patient to be kept informed as to the treatment or non-treatment of the patient at a hospital when considering further treatment in the community. 2. I request you to consider the above concerns and for both ████████ and The Priory Hospital, Altrincham to carry out a review with regard to the following. i. The systems procedures, policies and protocols in relation to contact with patients who fail to attend appointments. ii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments and to consider a final letter to the patient indicating that the patient will be discharged unless there is either contact or an appointment within a defined period. iii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to the discharge of patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments with notification to General Practitioners or other health professionals of the patient’s failure to attend appointments and their discharge from hospital. The review should consider timescales in relation to discharge when a patient has failed to attend appointments for a specific period of time. iv. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues. ”
    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 The Priory Hospital Altrincham; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to notify General Practitioners and other continuing-care professionals of missed appointments and hospital discharge status

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the Inquest evidence was heard that i. Mrs Greenwood had not been seen by ████████ at the Priory Hospital, Altrincham after her last review on the 21st November 2013 prior to her death on the 23rd December 2014. She had failed to attend appointments in January 2014 but there had been no contact with her, either by telephone or letter, following her failure to attend the appointment on the 16th January 2014. ii. Mrs Greenwood had not been discharged by ████████ following her failure to attend her appointment on the 16th January 2014 and before her death on the 23rd December 2014 but there had been no contact with her for a period exceeding 11 months. iii. ████████ had not made any contact with the General Practitioner to confirm Mrs Greenwood’s failure to attend her appointments in January 2014 and that she had not been seen after the 21st November 2013, which is a particular concern when an Advanced Nurse Practitioner reduced the medication initially prescribed by ████████ which she had the authority to reduce, in circumstances where ████████ had not seen Mrs Greenwood since the 21st November 2013. iv. There are no systems, either in ████████ private practice or in the Priory Hospital, Altrincham to contact patients following a failure to attend appointments and to consider the discharge of patients when a patient repeatedly fails to attend appointments over a period of time. There are no timescales with regard to the discharge of patients and no system to contact General Practitioners or other health professionals in relation to the failure to attend appointments, particularly in circumstances where other health professionals are likely to continue to treat patients after the missed appointments, including changes in medication. The importance of discharge within a reasonable period after a failure to attend appointments is important to enable other health professionals involved in continuing care to be aware of the non-attendance at appointments and the discharge. The fact that there has been no reported failure to attend appointments and no reported discharge would be misleading to other health professionals involved in continuing care, particularly when a patient has not been seen for a period in excess of 12 months and that information would not be available to other health professionals in the absence of information from the Hospital. There is a need for health professionals involved in the continuing care of a patient to be kept informed as to the treatment or non-treatment of the patient at a hospital when considering further treatment in the community. 2. I request you to consider the above concerns and for both ████████ and The Priory Hospital, Altrincham to carry out a review with regard to the following. i. The systems procedures, policies and protocols in relation to contact with patients who fail to attend appointments. ii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments and to consider a final letter to the patient indicating that the patient will be discharged unless there is either contact or an appointment within a defined period. iii. The systems, procedures, policies and protocols in relation to the discharge of patients who repeatedly fail to attend appointments with notification to General Practitioners or other health professionals of the patient’s failure to attend appointments and their discharge from hospital. The review should consider timescales in relation to discharge when a patient has failed to attend appointments for a specific period of time. iv. The evidence raised concerns that there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken to review the above issues. ”
    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