PFD report

Pamela Moran · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 12 Nov 2019•Swansea and Neath Port Talbot

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Source document

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 raised3

  1. Lack of documentation of discrepancies between clinicians’ accounts
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
  2. Lack of an overnight consultant authorisation pathway for next-day CT scans
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide timely access to clinically indicated CT scanning
  3. Failure to perform indicated CT head scans
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide timely access to clinically indicated CT scanningPart of recurring concern: Unreliable timeliness of radiology imaging and reporting
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 documentation of discrepancies between clinicians’ accounts

Wider context from the report

“During the course of the inquest a report from Dr ████████ instructed as an independent expert in this case, found 3 missed opportunities for the CT head scan to be performed. Dr ████████ conclusion noted at paragraph 6.5.6 that: “Regional neurosurgical services keep a record of the cases referred to them and discuss all cases at a handover meeting so that if the advice given is to carry out certain investigations or initiate a line of management and then ring back the second doctor giving advice has access to the earlier information. The discrepancy between D████████ account and Dr ████████ account of the conversation on the evening of 14 March 2017 about Mrs Moran unfortunately cannot be clarified by the use of structured documentation generated by either or both parties. Dr ████████ states that he was not given Mrs Moran’s name and has relied on his memory about anticoagulation and a previous CSH not being mentioned. The local system does not seem to facilitate an overnight consultant authorising a next day CT scan but relies on the junior doctors to hand over the task of requesting the scan again, possibly twice - firstly from the evening to the night shift doctors and then the night shift doctor to a third, different morning shift doctor. There may be other radiology services that have developed formal systems which the Health Board could adopt.” 1. There were 3 missed opportunities for a CT scan to be undertaken in this case, which may have prevented the deceased’s death, or at the very least improved her prospects of survival. 2. There appeared to be no documentation relating to the discrepancy between the accounts of Drs ████████████████ in respect of their conversation on the 14th of March 2017. 3. There does not appear to be a facility for an overnight consultant to authorise a next day CT scan, and relies on a junior doctor to hand over the task at the end of their shift. ”

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

Lack of an overnight consultant authorisation pathway for next-day CT scans

Wider context from the report

“During the course of the inquest a report from Dr ████████ instructed as an independent expert in this case, found 3 missed opportunities for the CT head scan to be performed. Dr ████████ conclusion noted at paragraph 6.5.6 that: “Regional neurosurgical services keep a record of the cases referred to them and discuss all cases at a handover meeting so that if the advice given is to carry out certain investigations or initiate a line of management and then ring back the second doctor giving advice has access to the earlier information. The discrepancy between D████████ account and Dr ████████ account of the conversation on the evening of 14 March 2017 about Mrs Moran unfortunately cannot be clarified by the use of structured documentation generated by either or both parties. Dr ████████ states that he was not given Mrs Moran’s name and has relied on his memory about anticoagulation and a previous CSH not being mentioned. The local system does not seem to facilitate an overnight consultant authorising a next day CT scan but relies on the junior doctors to hand over the task of requesting the scan again, possibly twice - firstly from the evening to the night shift doctors and then the night shift doctor to a third, different morning shift doctor. There may be other radiology services that have developed formal systems which the Health Board could adopt.” 1. There were 3 missed opportunities for a CT scan to be undertaken in this case, which may have prevented the deceased’s death, or at the very least improved her prospects of survival. 2. There appeared to be no documentation relating to the discrepancy between the accounts of Drs ████████████████ in respect of their conversation on the 14th of March 2017. 3. There does not appear to be a facility for an overnight consultant to authorise a next day CT scan, and relies on a junior doctor to hand over the task at the end of their shift. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely access to clinically indicated CT scanning.

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

Failure to perform indicated CT head scans

Wider context from the report

“During the course of the inquest a report from Dr ████████ instructed as an independent expert in this case, found 3 missed opportunities for the CT head scan to be performed. Dr ████████ conclusion noted at paragraph 6.5.6 that: “Regional neurosurgical services keep a record of the cases referred to them and discuss all cases at a handover meeting so that if the advice given is to carry out certain investigations or initiate a line of management and then ring back the second doctor giving advice has access to the earlier information. The discrepancy between D████████ account and Dr ████████ account of the conversation on the evening of 14 March 2017 about Mrs Moran unfortunately cannot be clarified by the use of structured documentation generated by either or both parties. Dr ████████ states that he was not given Mrs Moran’s name and has relied on his memory about anticoagulation and a previous CSH not being mentioned. The local system does not seem to facilitate an overnight consultant authorising a next day CT scan but relies on the junior doctors to hand over the task of requesting the scan again, possibly twice - firstly from the evening to the night shift doctors and then the night shift doctor to a third, different morning shift doctor. There may be other radiology services that have developed formal systems which the Health Board could adopt.” 1. There were 3 missed opportunities for a CT scan to be undertaken in this case, which may have prevented the deceased’s death, or at the very least improved her prospects of survival. 2. There appeared to be no documentation relating to the discrepancy between the accounts of Drs ████████████████ in respect of their conversation on the 14th of March 2017. 3. There does not appear to be a facility for an overnight consultant to authorise a next day CT scan, and relies on a junior doctor to hand over the task at the end of their shift. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely access to clinically indicated CT scanning; Unreliable timeliness of radiology imaging and reporting.

Open source report
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
0/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.