PFD report

Alwyn Ann Head · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 23 Mar 2016•Mid Kent and Medway

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
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
20

Described in responses

Recipients and published 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 raised5

  1. Failure to record meaningful nursing information about dressing and wound condition
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate district nursing wound carePart of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
  2. Failure to establish MRSA history before surgery
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete clinical history-takingPart of recurring concern: Unreliable pre-operative assessment arrangements delaying or compromising surgery
  3. Failure to inspect the surgical wound
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable post-operative monitoring and clinical reviewPart of recurring concern: Unreliable postoperative clinical review and complication response
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.10

  1. Action

    Amend the surgical safety checklist to verify MRSA status and history with patients and staff before induction and at theatre sign-in.

    Stated by The TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  2. Action

    Update orthopaedic antimicrobial guidelines to clarify prophylaxis for patients with unknown MRSA status.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  3. Action

    Monitor compliance with wound-care policies and procedures through established assurance audits and governance forums.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.

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 record meaningful nursing information about dressing and wound condition

Wider context from the report

“(5) Entries in the nursing notes relating to dressing and wound were meaningless and would not assist a determination of whether there was deterioration in the wound ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate district nursing wound care; 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

Failure to establish MRSA history before surgery

Wider context from the report

“(1) That Mrs Head had a history of MRSA was not established prior to surgery despite opportunities in 3 different hospital departments to obtain this information from Mrs. Head or her family ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete clinical history-taking; Unreliable pre-operative assessment arrangements delaying or compromising surgery.

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 inspect the surgical wound

Wider context from the report

“(4) There was no evidence of the surgical wound having been inspected by nursing staff or doctors between the 13th August and 25th August 2015 ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable post-operative monitoring and clinical review; Unreliable postoperative clinical review and complication response.

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 provide prophylactic Teicoplanin when indicated by MRSA risk

Wider context from the report

“(2) Prophylactic Teicoplanin was not provided pre- or post-operatively even though the results of an MRSA screen would not have been available at the time of surgery (MRSA –ve written on pre-op form erroneously) ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide indicated antibiotic prophylaxis.

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 institute a post-operative wound care plan

Wider context from the report

“(3) A post-operative wound care plan was not instituted contrary to NICE guidelines ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Amend the surgical safety checklist to verify MRSA status and history with patients and staff before induction and at theatre sign-in.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The surgical safety checklist is being amended to ensure MRSA status and MRSA History is verified by two staff and with the patient pre operatively in the Anaesthetic Room before induction and again with the whole theatre team at ‘sign in’.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Update orthopaedic antimicrobial guidelines to clarify prophylaxis for patients with unknown MRSA status.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have recognised the importance of ensuring that MRSA status is checked and appropriate antibiotic regime applied. The orthopaedic antimicrobial guidelines have been updated to provide more clarity over the prophylaxis for patients with unknown MRSA status.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Monitor compliance with wound-care policies and procedures through established assurance audits and governance forums.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Compliance with the policies and SOPs will be monitored as part of our established assurance audits. Results of audits are presented at Patient Safety Group which has responsibility for monitoring compliance in this area and the Nursing & Midwifery Quality Forum.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Update tissue-viability policy and procedures with NICE guidance and post-operative surgical-wound management standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are updating our tissue viability policy and associated standard operating procedures (SOPs) to include NICE guidance and standards for post-operative surgical wound management.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Disseminate the new infection-status documentation through twice-monthly infection-control update sessions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Staff are made aware of the new documentation on the twice monthly level 3 infection control update sessions.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Incorporate infection-status and wound-care documentation into the new nursing assessment and care-planning document.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The new documentation will be incorporated into a new nursing patient assessment / care planning document which is due to be implemented in July 2016.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 new admission and transfer documentation to record patient infection status.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We acknowledge that although Mrs Head had a history of MRSA this was not established prior to the surgical procedure. We have therefore introduced a series of measures to reduce the risk of this situation re-occurring, which are:”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Check completion of infection-status documentation during daily patient reviews and provide nursing feedback.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• As part of their daily routine patient reviews the infection control team are checking the new documentation has been completed and provide the nursing staff with feedback at the time.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 wound-care documentation and standards to safety and nursing quality forums and cascade them through directorates.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The documentation and standards will be presented to the Trust Patient Safety Group and the Nursing & Midwifery Quality Forum. Directorate representatives will be responsible for cascading the information through their Directorate.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Review wound-care documentation, care plans and wound-assessment standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Wound care documentation, care plans and wound assessment standards have all been reviewed. The wound care documentation will be incorporated into the new nursing assessment / care planning document in July 2016.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.10

  1. 1

    Participate in the Sepsis Nurse Forum.

    Stated by The TrustStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  2. 2

    Conduct ward-to-board rounds to assess and monitor patients’ conditions more regularly.

    Stated by The TrustStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  3. 3

    Share investigation learning with the relevant ward and across the Trust.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  4. 4

    Audit performance against the Sepsis Six bundle monthly.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  5. 5

    Conduct learning events across the Trust on sepsis and deteriorating-patient care.

    Stated by The TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  6. 6

    Implement the deteriorating-patient programme to improve early recognition, timely response and data quality.

    Stated by The TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  7. 7

    Report documentation-review outcomes monthly and provide additional infection-control support where compliance is poor.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  8. 8

    Operate a multidisciplinary sepsis action group monitoring sepsis-bundle, CQUIN and mortality performance.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  9. 9

    Provide a robust education and training programme on sepsis and deteriorating patients.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.
  10. 10

    Provide feedback to the NICE consultation on proposed sepsis guidance.

    Stated by The TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 March 2016.

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

Participate in the Sepsis Nurse Forum.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Trust representation at the Sepsis Nurse Forum.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 3 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 ward-to-board rounds to assess and monitor patients’ conditions more regularly.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Ward to Board rounds to assess and monitor patients’ conditions more regularly”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 investigation learning with the relevant ward and across the Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The learning from our investigation into Mrs Head’s death has been shared with the specific ward and also Trust wide.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 3 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Audit performance against the Sepsis Six bundle monthly.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Monthly auditing against the Sepsis bundle”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 3 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 learning events across the Trust on sepsis and deteriorating-patient care.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Learning events have commenced across the Trust”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 3 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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 the deteriorating-patient programme to improve early recognition, timely response and data quality.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition, the recognition and management of Sepsis and the Deteriorating Patient are key priorities for the Trust. A programme of work has commenced which aims to improve patient safety, outcomes and reduce the incidence of deterioration and sepsis, through early recognition and timely response.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Report documentation-review outcomes monthly and provide additional infection-control support where compliance is poor.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The outcome of the patient reviews are reported monthly and areas of poor compliance will receive additional support from the infection control team.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Operate a multidisciplinary sepsis action group monitoring sepsis-bundle, CQUIN and mortality performance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• A multi-disciplinary Sepsis Action group is in place which monitors performance against the Sepsis six bundle, the National CQUIN performance and sepsis mortality.”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Provide a robust education and training programme on sepsis and deteriorating patients.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• A robust Education and Training programme in place”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 3 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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

Provide feedback to the NICE consultation on proposed sepsis guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The Trust has provided feedback to the NICE consultation on the proposed new Sepsis Guidance (due to be published in July 2016).”

Source location

A-head-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 23 March 2016

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