Alan Bevis TOMLINSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 6 Mar 2026•Gwent

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
6

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
17

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised6

  1. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information during clinic visits
  2. Inadequate documentation of clinical findings
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
  3. Inadequate communication of clinical findings to the Cardiology team
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable communication with cardiology teams about patient care

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.17

  1. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Implement the Fysicon electronic patient record to incorporate clinical notes and provide trend data for clinical decision-making.

  2. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Continue strengthening physiologist training to prevent similar harm.

  3. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Continue monitoring compliance with the safety improvements.

  4. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Circulate guidance on when and how physiologists should escalate patients to a cardiologist.

  5. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Implement revised device escalation and referral criteria, including a mandatory referral trigger for loss of a twofold safety margin.

  6. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Require clinic entries to document clinical findings, implant-site observations, red flags, patient symptoms, device data, and associated tests.

  7. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Introduce a clinical history sheet requiring red-flag assessment and documented inspection of device implantation sites during device-check appointments.

  8. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Present the device escalation SOP at the departmental Quality and Safety meeting.

  9. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Share the device escalation SOP with all physiologists.

  10. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Conduct benchmarking exercises to develop service improvements.

  11. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Develop broader red-flag questions and an associated training package for device clinics.

  12. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Develop specific Cardiac Physiology inboxes within the existing e-Advice system.

  13. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Deliver physiologist training on infective endocarditis, unwell-patient red flags, and cardiology escalation.

  14. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Establish audits of notes-standard compliance and e-Advice usage and response times.

  15. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Continue enhancing clinical pathways to prevent similar harm.

  16. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Conduct monthly notes audits during the quarter following SOP presentation.

  17. Cardiff & Vale University LHB

    Share the inquest and Regulation 28 findings with Cardiology, Clinical Board leadership, and the Quality and Safety Committee.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inconsistent gathering of clinical information during clinic visits

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inadequate documentation of clinical findings

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inadequate communication of clinical findings to the Cardiology team

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable communication with cardiology teams about patient care.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable cardiology pathways for specialist review.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable prevention and management of infective endocarditis.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inconsistent implant site checks during clinic visits

Wider context from the report

“Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to perform clinically indicated physical examinations.

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

Implement the Fysicon electronic patient record to incorporate clinical notes and provide trend data for clinical decision-making.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Digital Support We are implementing the Fysicon system, which is an electronic patient record. This will incorporate all clinical notes and will provide trend data to further enhance the clinical decision making and improve patient outcomes.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Continue strengthening physiologist training to prevent similar harm.

Verbatim wording from the response

“will continue to monitor compliance, strengthen training, and enhance our clinical pathways to prevent similar harm.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 3 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Continue monitoring compliance with the safety improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“will continue to monitor compliance, strengthen training, and enhance our clinical pathways to prevent similar harm.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 3 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Circulate guidance on when and how physiologists should escalate patients to a cardiologist.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Training sessions have been arranged for delivery covering: ○ Recognition of infective endocarditis, including atypical presentations, will be delivered by a Consultant Cardiologist. ○ Recognising the generally unwell patient and Red Flags which will be delivered by the Nursing Practice Educators. ○ When and how to escalate to a cardiologist has been circulated via e-mail and will be delivered on the 13th of May Quality and Safety afternoon.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Implement revised device escalation and referral criteria, including a mandatory referral trigger for loss of a twofold safety margin.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions The Health Board takes these findings extremely seriously. In response, the following actions have already been implemented:”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 1 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Require clinic entries to document clinical findings, implant-site observations, red flags, patient symptoms, device data, and associated tests.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Strengthened Documentation and Communication Pathways”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Introduce a clinical history sheet requiring red-flag assessment and documented inspection of device implantation sites during device-check appointments.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Enhanced Clinical Assessment Standards”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Present the device escalation SOP at the departmental Quality and Safety meeting.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• A mandatory referral trigger is now in place if a device has lost a twofold safety margin. This has been clearly documented in the “Managing the Unwell Patient Standard Operating Procedure” (attached) which is stored on the departmental SharePoint.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 1 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Share the device escalation SOP with all physiologists.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• A mandatory referral trigger is now in place if a device has lost a twofold safety margin. This has been clearly documented in the “Managing the Unwell Patient Standard Operating Procedure” (attached) which is stored on the departmental SharePoint.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 1 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Conduct benchmarking exercises to develop service improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To develop these service improvements benchmarking exercises were conducted. The development of the Red Flag questions is a change to practice in Wales. On discussion with our colleagues in neighbouring health boards, it appears the undergraduate Cardiac Physiology teaching on recognition of systemic illness in patients is limited. The questions in device clinics remain focused on cardiology specific conditions, such as heart failure. As a Health Board, we recognise that this would be too limited for our patient cohort. We have, therefore, developed broader Red Flag questions and an associated training package.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Develop broader red-flag questions and an associated training package for device clinics.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To develop these service improvements benchmarking exercises were conducted. The development of the Red Flag questions is a change to practice in Wales. On discussion with our colleagues in neighbouring health boards, it appears the undergraduate Cardiac Physiology teaching on recognition of systemic illness in patients is limited. The questions in device clinics remain focused on cardiology specific conditions, such as heart failure. As a Health Board, we recognise that this would be too limited for our patient cohort. We have, therefore, developed broader Red Flag questions and an associated training package.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Develop specific Cardiac Physiology inboxes within the existing e-Advice system.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Strengthened Documentation and Communication Pathways”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Deliver physiologist training on infective endocarditis, unwell-patient red flags, and cardiology escalation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Training and Education for Physiologists”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Establish audits of notes-standard compliance and e-Advice usage and response times.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Audit and Quality Assurance”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Continue enhancing clinical pathways to prevent similar harm.

Verbatim wording from the response

“will continue to monitor compliance, strengthen training, and enhance our clinical pathways to prevent similar harm.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 3 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Conduct monthly notes audits during the quarter following SOP presentation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Monthly notes audits will be conducted for the quarter following presentation of the SOP on the 13th of May.”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

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

Share the inquest and Regulation 28 findings with Cardiology, Clinical Board leadership, and the Quality and Safety Committee.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Engagement With Staff and Wider Learning The findings of the inquest and your Regulation 28 report have been:”

Source location

Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Page 2 · response
Published 10 March 2026

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026