PFD report

Lorraine Sandra Parker · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 23 Apr 2025•Berkshire

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
3

Named on the report

Responses found
4

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
10

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 take postoperative CRP results into account in discharge and scanning decisions
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical review and authorisation of discharge decisionsPart of recurring concern: Unreliable hospital discharge processes
  2. Lack of guidance requiring consideration of CT scanning when CRP is high and not decreasing or rising after major abdominal surgery
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate safety guidance for CT scanning and reportingPart of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical decisions about when CT scanning is neededPart of recurring concern: Unreliable monitoring and follow-up of clinically required laboratory tests
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.4

  1. Action

    Provide existing guidance on postoperative CRP monitoring and CT investigation triggers.

    Stated by The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and IrelandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  2. Action

    Contact ACPGBI to support its assessment of guidance needs and dissemination of any resulting guidance or communications.

    Stated by Royal College of Surgeons of EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  3. Action

    Direct South East Clinical Quality colleagues to engage with the relevant ICB or Trust and seek assurance that learning from Lorraine’s case has been taken.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.6

  1. Position

    Existing guidance on CRP monitoring and CT investigation makes further ACPGBI guidance unnecessary at this time.

    Stated by The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and IrelandExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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 take postoperative CRP results into account in discharge and scanning decisions

Wider context from the report

“2. There is currently no guidance which requires surgeons to consider scanning for patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and whose CRP is high and not decreasing, as was the case here at the time Lorraine was discharged from hospital on 31st January 2024. 3. There may be some difficulty in creating a hard line requirement for CT scanning based on a particular CRP result, but I am concerned that there is no guidance in place for requiring a consultant to consider this – perhaps when the CRP is above a certain figure and either not decreasing or continuing to rise. Any such guidance could still allow for clinical judgement – and documenting of the reasons for that decision. 4. It is my experience that clinical judgement alone, particularly where a patient looks well “from the end of the bed” is not always sufficient in this scenario. I have seen a number of avoidable death cases in this context. The purpose of blood test results is to flag up objective areas of concern. There is much reference to chasing up CRP results in Lorraine’s records, but these do not appear to have been taken into account at the time that she was discharged from the hospital without a post-operative scan. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical review and authorisation of discharge decisions; Unreliable hospital discharge processes.

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 guidance requiring consideration of CT scanning when CRP is high and not decreasing or rising after major abdominal surgery

Wider context from the report

“2. There is currently no guidance which requires surgeons to consider scanning for patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and whose CRP is high and not decreasing, as was the case here at the time Lorraine was discharged from hospital on 31st January 2024. 3. There may be some difficulty in creating a hard line requirement for CT scanning based on a particular CRP result, but I am concerned that there is no guidance in place for requiring a consultant to consider this – perhaps when the CRP is above a certain figure and either not decreasing or continuing to rise. Any such guidance could still allow for clinical judgement – and documenting of the reasons for that decision. 4. It is my experience that clinical judgement alone, particularly where a patient looks well “from the end of the bed” is not always sufficient in this scenario. I have seen a number of avoidable death cases in this context. The purpose of blood test results is to flag up objective areas of concern. There is much reference to chasing up CRP results in Lorraine’s records, but these do not appear to have been taken into account at the time that she was discharged from the hospital without a post-operative scan. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate safety guidance for CT scanning and reporting; Unreliable clinical decisions about when CT scanning is needed; Unreliable monitoring and follow-up of clinically required laboratory tests.

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

Provide existing guidance on postoperative CRP monitoring and CT investigation triggers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In relation to the matters of concern raised, I attach Issues in Professional Practice Guidance on the Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak, produced in collaboration with ACPGBI. Although published in 2016, the guidance around post-operative CRP monitoring and triggering subsequent radiological investigation remains as pertinent to clinical practice now as it was then. Please see in particular pages 16-17, where cut off values for CRP triggering a subsequent CT scan are also considered. In addition, there have been several subsequent publications (available on Pubmed) confirming this practice.”

Source location

Response from The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Contact ACPGBI to support its assessment of guidance needs and dissemination of any resulting guidance or communications.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Deterioration of the surgical patient following bowel surgery, and appropriate perioperative care, is covered in the postgraduate training surgical curriculum in the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (often referred to as ‘ISCP’). We note that the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) has been informed of the report and they are best placed to consider the need for guidance. We will contact them to support their assessment and any dissemination of guidance or other communications.”

Source location

Response from Royal College of Surgeons
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Direct South East Clinical Quality colleagues to engage with the relevant ICB or Trust and seek assurance that learning from Lorraine’s case has been taken.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS England notes the local delays in reporting experienced by Lorraine, who was sent home on 31 January 2024 without a post-operative scan despite an elevated CRP, together with the misreporting of the CT scan in February 2024. Clinical Quality colleagues in the South East region have been made aware of your Report and asked to engage with the relevant Integrated Care Board / Trust on the details of Lorraine’s case and to seek assurance that learnings have been taken.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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 the case details with NICE’s prioritisation team for consideration of whether further action is needed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The NICE guideline does not provide detailed protocols for postoperative tests or scans, and clinicians would be expected to use their judgement and follow local protocols or other relevant professional guidance. However, whilst the Department has no immediate plans to instruct NICE to produce standalone guidance on post-surgery imaging based on CRP thresholds, details of this case have been shared with colleagues in NICE’s prioritisation team to consider if further action should be taken.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Existing guidance on CRP monitoring and CT investigation makes further ACPGBI guidance unnecessary at this time.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In relation to the matters of concern raised, I attach Issues in Professional Practice Guidance on the Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak, produced in collaboration with ACPGBI. Although published in 2016, the guidance around post-operative CRP monitoring and triggering subsequent radiological investigation remains as pertinent to clinical practice now as it was then. Please see in particular pages 16-17, where cut off values for CRP triggering a subsequent CT scan are also considered. In addition, there have been several subsequent publications (available on Pubmed) confirming this practice.”

Source location

Response from The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

ACPGBI is best placed to consider whether guidance is needed on recognising deterioration after bowel surgery.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Deterioration of the surgical patient following bowel surgery, and appropriate perioperative care, is covered in the postgraduate training surgical curriculum in the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (often referred to as ‘ISCP’). We note that the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) has been informed of the report and they are best placed to consider the need for guidance. We will contact them to support their assessment and any dissemination of guidance or other communications.”

Source location

Response from Royal College of Surgeons
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Clinical guidance is primarily the responsibility of NICE and relevant Royal Colleges, while Trusts should implement appropriate local processes or guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While NHS England notes your concerns, clinical guidelines are primarily the responsibility of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the appropriate Royal Colleges. NHS Trusts are expected to have due regard to any clinical guidelines and to implement the appropriate local processes and/or guidance. I note that you have also addressed your Report to the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain (ACPGBI) and the Royal College of Surgeons, who are the more appropriate organisations to respond to your concerns.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Further guidance on CT scanning after abdominal surgery with raised CRP is not required because existing guidance and evidence address anastomotic leaks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS England has however discussed your Report with the ACPGBI, and it is agreed that there is not a requirement for further guidance to be written. CRP levels are”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

NHS Trusts are responsible for ensuring staff competence and should review their clinical protocols following the case.

Verbatim wording from the response

“With regard to concerns about clinical judgement, NHS Trusts are responsible for ensuring staff are sufficiently competent to deliver care. Accordingly, the Trust in question should consider their protocols in the wake of this case. The CQC has passed details of the case to the relevant inspection team for Royal Berkshire Hospital for further consideration.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Existing NICE guidance, clinical judgement, local protocols and relevant professional guidance are relied upon instead of standalone CRP-based postoperative imaging guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“With regard to concerns about guidance for clinicians, the NICE guideline on colorectal cancer (NG151) aims to improve quality of life and survival for adults with colorectal cancer by providing evidence-based recommendations on the management of both local disease and metastatic (secondary) cancer. It covers which interventions should be used for different types and stages of the disease, helping to guide decisions on surgery, chemotherapy, and other treatments.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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.6

  1. 1

    Encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to include a comparable anonymised educational vignette in its surgical safety reporting.

    Stated by Royal College of Surgeons of EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  2. 2

    Include an anonymised educational surgical vignette about the death in CORESS safety reports published in journals and circulated to members.

    Stated by Royal College of Surgeons of EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  3. 3

    Discuss all Prevention of Future Deaths reports through the Regulation 28 Working Group to share learning nationally and regionally and identify emerging trends requiring review or action.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  4. 4

    Implement the National Cancer Plan for England to reduce cancer deaths and improve patient outcomes and experience.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  5. 5

    Implement the 10-Year Health Plan to reform the NHS and improve future care.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.
  6. 6

    Implement the refreshed workforce plan to ensure the NHS has appropriately skilled staff to deliver patient care.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.

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

Encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to include a comparable anonymised educational vignette in its surgical safety reporting.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We will ensure that a precautionary anonymised educational surgical vignette relating to this death is included in the Confidential Reporting System for Surgery (CORESS) surgical safety feedback reports published in the journals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and circulated to our members. We will also encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to do the same.”

Source location

Response from Royal College of Surgeons
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Include an anonymised educational surgical vignette about the death in CORESS safety reports published in journals and circulated to members.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We will ensure that a precautionary anonymised educational surgical vignette relating to this death is included in the Confidential Reporting System for Surgery (CORESS) surgical safety feedback reports published in the journals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and circulated to our members. We will also encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to do the same.”

Source location

Response from Royal College of Surgeons
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Discuss all Prevention of Future Deaths reports through the Regulation 28 Working Group to share learning nationally and regionally and identify emerging trends requiring review or action.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I would also like to provide further assurances on the national NHS England work taking place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are discussed by the Regulation 28 Working Group, comprising Regional Medical Directors, and other clinical and quality colleagues from across the regions. This ensures that key learnings and insights around events, such as the sad death of Lorraine, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us to pay close attention to any emerging trends that may require further review and action.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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 National Cancer Plan for England to reduce cancer deaths and improve patient outcomes and experience.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Lord Darzi’s independent report on the state of the NHS highlighted the challenges facing our health service, which is why we have launched:”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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 10-Year Health Plan to reform the NHS and improve future care.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Lord Darzi’s independent report on the state of the NHS highlighted the challenges facing our health service, which is why we have launched:”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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 refreshed workforce plan to ensure the NHS has appropriately skilled staff to deliver patient care.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Lord Darzi’s independent report on the state of the NHS highlighted the challenges facing our health service, which is why we have launched:”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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
4/3

Data last updated 7 September 2026