PFD report

Chloe May Lumb · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 17 Feb 2022•Teesside and Hartlepool

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
2

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 raised2

  1. Lack of clinical guidance or pathway for suspected aortic dissection requiring ECG-gated CT scanning
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to reliably recognise and respond to suspected aortic dissection
  2. Failure to alert Emergency Department staff to patients’ genetic risk of aortic dissection
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 clinical guidance or pathway for suspected aortic dissection requiring ECG-gated CT scanning

Wider context from the report

“There was no clinical guidance or pathway within the Emergency Department of the hospital for patients presenting with suspected aortic dissection that should have included a directive to ensure that an ECG gated CT scan is carried out to exclude the possibility of such condition. When the Emergency Department were contacted by Ms Lumb on 5th January 2021 there was no mechanism by which staff were alerted to her genetic risk of aortic dissection leading to advice merely to contact her GP ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably recognise and respond to suspected aortic dissection.

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 alert Emergency Department staff to patients’ genetic risk of aortic dissection

Wider context from the report

“There was no clinical guidance or pathway within the Emergency Department of the hospital for patients presenting with suspected aortic dissection that should have included a directive to ensure that an ECG gated CT scan is carried out to exclude the possibility of such condition. When the Emergency Department were contacted by Ms Lumb on 5th January 2021 there was no mechanism by which staff were alerted to her genetic risk of aortic dissection leading to advice merely to contact her GP ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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.