PFD report

Francoise Simone Annabel SNAPE · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 13 Feb 2013•Worcestershire

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. Failure to complete VTE assessments
  2. Lack of knowledge and consideration of NICE guidance on mechanical anti-DVT devices
    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.

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

Failure to complete VTE assessments

Wider context from the report

“(1) No VTE assessment was ever made of Mrs Snape. The explanation given by ████████ was that staff were too busy to complete the form and that because she had had a stroke heparin could not be given and therefore the paperwork was unnecessary. (2) NICE guidelines regarding the use of mechanical anti DVT devices instead of heparin in high risk cases was not considered. ████████ indicated in his evidence that the guidance on such matters was to be found in "general" guidance regarding DVTs and not in "stroke" guidance. The clear difference was that he was not aware of the content of the general guidance despite it being specifically referred to as involving stroke patients. It was clear in the Inquest that the absence of a formally completed VTE assessment and lack of knowledge of NICE guidelines amounted to a lost opportunity to make informed decisions for the care of Mrs Snape which may (but only may) have changed the outcome for her. (3) ”

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

Lack of knowledge and consideration of NICE guidance on mechanical anti-DVT devices

Wider context from the report

“(1) No VTE assessment was ever made of Mrs Snape. The explanation given by ████████ was that staff were too busy to complete the form and that because she had had a stroke heparin could not be given and therefore the paperwork was unnecessary. (2) NICE guidelines regarding the use of mechanical anti DVT devices instead of heparin in high risk cases was not considered. ████████ indicated in his evidence that the guidance on such matters was to be found in "general" guidance regarding DVTs and not in "stroke" guidance. The clear difference was that he was not aware of the content of the general guidance despite it being specifically referred to as involving stroke patients. It was clear in the Inquest that the absence of a formally completed VTE assessment and lack of knowledge of NICE guidelines amounted to a lost opportunity to make informed decisions for the care of Mrs Snape which may (but only may) have changed the outcome for her. (3) ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

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

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.