PFD report

David Andrew Bladen · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 4 Mar 2015•South Yorkshire (Eastern)

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
2

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 raised1

  1. Lack of guidance for thromboprophylaxis management in patients with restricted mobility who are not in casts
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate thromboprophylaxis for patients at risk of venous thromboembolism
Responses linked to these concerns

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

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

  1. Action

    Update the clinical guideline and prepare a new scope through the routine surveillance process.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 4 March 2015.
  2. Action

    Forward the report to guideline developers so they can consider the concerns about guidance for patients in braces.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 4 March 2015.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Available evidence does not warrant a specific prophylaxis recommendation for patients in braces.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 for thromboprophylaxis management in patients with restricted mobility who are not in casts

Wider context from the report

“(1) Absence of guidance for optimum thromboprophylaxis management in patients who are not in casts but still have restriction of mobility eg. due to a brace. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate thromboprophylaxis for patients at risk of venous thromboembolism.

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

Update the clinical guideline and prepare a new scope through the routine surveillance process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of our routine surveillance process, this guideline is to be updated and a new scope will be prepared as part of the process. We have not yet scheduled this project into our work programme, however I will make arrangements for a copy of your report to be forwarded to guideline developers at the appropriate time so that they are aware of the circumstances around this case and your concerns about the lack of specific guidance for patients in a brace. Please let me know if you or Mr Bladen’s family would prefer that this information should not be shared.”

Source location

2015-0079-Response-by-NICE
Page 2 · response
Published 4 March 2015

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

Forward the report to guideline developers so they can consider the concerns about guidance for patients in braces.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of our routine surveillance process, this guideline is to be updated and a new scope will be prepared as part of the process. We have not yet scheduled this project into our work programme, however I will make arrangements for a copy of your report to be forwarded to guideline developers at the appropriate time so that they are aware of the circumstances around this case and your concerns about the lack of specific guidance for patients in a brace. Please let me know if you or Mr Bladen’s family would prefer that this information should not be shared.”

Source location

2015-0079-Response-by-NICE
Page 2 · response
Published 4 March 2015

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

Available evidence does not warrant a specific prophylaxis recommendation for patients in braces.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As you are aware we make a specific recommendation on pharmacological VTE prophylaxis to patients with lower limb casts, however there was no evidence to indicate that a specific recommendation on prophylaxis for patients in a brace was warranted.”

Source location

2015-0079-Response-by-NICE
Page 1 · response
Published 4 March 2015

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