PFD report

Mrs Violet Levine Nelson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Dec 2017•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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
3

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
4

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 raised3

  1. Failure to oversee or verify ultrasonography reports by a Consultant Radiologist
  2. Ultrasound reports failing to carry appropriate recommendations to referring clinicians
  3. Lack of General Practitioner awareness that a supra-renal aortic aneurysm finding may indicate a larger thoracic aortic aneurysm requiring further investigation
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate detection and management of abdominal aortic aneurysms
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.3

  1. Action

    Communicate to radiology services the need for clear processes for sonographer onward referral or handling by an authorised colleague.

    Stated by Society and College of Radiographers (SCoRStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 11 February 2018.
  2. Action

    Review SCoR and BMUS ultrasound guidelines to add guidance on suspected supra-renal aneurysm referral, imaging, and anatomical assessment.

    Stated by Society and College of Radiographers (SCoRStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 11 February 2018.
  3. Action

    Ensure the NICE lead for the abdominal aortic aneurysm guideline is aware of the Coroner’s concerns.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 11 February 2018.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    Where local policy does not authorise sonographers to recommend additional imaging, a radiologist should advise on further imaging or referral.

    Stated by Society and College of Radiographers (SCoRRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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 oversee or verify ultrasonography reports by a Consultant Radiologist

Wider context from the report

“(1) If the reports of Ultrasonography in 2012, 2013 and 2014 had been overseen/verified by a Consultant Radiologist, it is likely that referral of Mrs Nelson to a Vascular Surgeon and CT examination of the chest would have prompted an appropriate response by the referring GP. (2) It is more likely than not that General Practitioners are not aware of the fact that the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a larger Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm and that, in consequence, CT examination of the chest should be performed or the patient should be referred to a Vascular Surgeon. (3) Therefore, without an ultrasound report carrying an appropriate recommendation to the referring Clinician and if General Practitioners are not made aware of the fact the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a large Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm requiring further investigation, similar deaths to that suffered by Mrs Nelson may occur in the future. ”

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

Ultrasound reports failing to carry appropriate recommendations to referring clinicians

Wider context from the report

“(1) If the reports of Ultrasonography in 2012, 2013 and 2014 had been overseen/verified by a Consultant Radiologist, it is likely that referral of Mrs Nelson to a Vascular Surgeon and CT examination of the chest would have prompted an appropriate response by the referring GP. (2) It is more likely than not that General Practitioners are not aware of the fact that the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a larger Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm and that, in consequence, CT examination of the chest should be performed or the patient should be referred to a Vascular Surgeon. (3) Therefore, without an ultrasound report carrying an appropriate recommendation to the referring Clinician and if General Practitioners are not made aware of the fact the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a large Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm requiring further investigation, similar deaths to that suffered by Mrs Nelson may occur in the future. ”

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 General Practitioner awareness that a supra-renal aortic aneurysm finding may indicate a larger thoracic aortic aneurysm requiring further investigation

Wider context from the report

“(1) If the reports of Ultrasonography in 2012, 2013 and 2014 had been overseen/verified by a Consultant Radiologist, it is likely that referral of Mrs Nelson to a Vascular Surgeon and CT examination of the chest would have prompted an appropriate response by the referring GP. (2) It is more likely than not that General Practitioners are not aware of the fact that the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a larger Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm and that, in consequence, CT examination of the chest should be performed or the patient should be referred to a Vascular Surgeon. (3) Therefore, without an ultrasound report carrying an appropriate recommendation to the referring Clinician and if General Practitioners are not made aware of the fact the Ultrasonography finding of an Aneurysm of the Supra-renal Aorta is likely to indicate the presence of a large Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm requiring further investigation, similar deaths to that suffered by Mrs Nelson may occur in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate detection and management of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

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

Communicate to radiology services the need for clear processes for sonographer onward referral or handling by an authorised colleague.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4. We will undertake an exercise to communicate to radiology services the need for sonographers to have clear processes for arranging onward referral or for ensuring this is handled by a suitable colleague in authority.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-SoR
Page 3 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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 SCoR and BMUS ultrasound guidelines to add guidance on suspected supra-renal aneurysm referral, imaging, and anatomical assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. We will review the SCoR and BMUS guidelines (2017), specifically to include guidance on referral of suspected supra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysms for thoracic CT, review by a radiologist or a vascular surgeon.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-SoR
Page 3 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

Ensure the NICE lead for the abdominal aortic aneurysm guideline is aware of the Coroner’s concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NICE are developing new Clinical Guideline on “Abdominal aortic aneurysm: diagnosis and management”; the expected publication date is November 2018.¹ The guideline is intended for a wide audience, including patients and their families. It will also provide standards and thresholds for clinicians involved in the diagnosis and management of patients with AAs. This appears to be a timely opportunity for NHS England to inform the NICE AAA Committee of the concerns you raised and ask them to consider incorporating appropriate advice to all relevant clinical professions. Therefore, I will ensure that the NICE lead for this Guideline, Mr Andrew Bradbury, is aware of your Regulation 28 letter and the concerns raised by you.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-NHS-Engalnd
Page 2 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

Where local policy does not authorise sonographers to recommend additional imaging, a radiologist should advise on further imaging or referral.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is known that this practice of sonographers recommending additional investigations varies across the UK, dependent on local protocols and schemes of work. In some departments, policy allows Sonographers only to provide a descriptive report and there would not be authority to recommend additional imaging. In these cases, a radiologist opinion should be sought for advising on further imaging or referral.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-SoR
Page 3 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

Sonographer-led ultrasound examinations are not inherently lower standard than consultant radiologist examinations; evidence indicates equivalent interpretation and reporting capability.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To comment first on your matters of concern (section 5 of the report), with reference to matter number 1, there is an implication that sonographer-led examinations are of a lower standard than those of a consultant radiologist. The performing and reporting of ultrasound examinations, including of the vascular system, by non-medically qualified sonographers is extremely well established practice in the UK. There is extensive audit and research evidence to show that image interpretation and reporting capabilities are equivalent to radiologists and this has led to widespread local practices where suitably skilled sonographers work autonomously in scanning and reporting cases such as that in your investigation.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-SoR
Page 1 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

Local hospital radiology and vascular surgery departments determine referral thresholds for suprarenal aortic aneurysms.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Dr Matt Houghton, Medical Director of the Clinical Innovation and Research Centre in the RCGP understands that the cut-offs for referrals for the size of a suprarenal aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) after ultrasound is usually determined locally in the hospital between the local radiology department and the local vascular surgeons. It may be worth asking the Royal Berkshire Hospital Reading for their protocol during the time period the ultrasound scans took”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-RCGP
Page 1 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

The Royal College of General Practitioners and Society of Radiographers may address the specific concerns about ultrasound report content.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I note that your Report has been sent to The Royal College of General Practitioners and The Society of Radiographers who may be able to address your specific concerns as detailed in section 5 of your Report.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-NHS-Engalnd
Page 1 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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.1

  1. 1

    Ensure the Coroner’s report is considered by the National Clinical Director for Diagnostics’ working group review of another aortic aneurysm case.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 11 February 2018.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    The AAA screening programme remains limited to men aged 65 because evidence indicates abdominal aortic aneurysms are very rare in women.

    Stated by NHS EnglandExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Ensure the Coroner’s report is considered by the National Clinical Director for Diagnostics’ working group review of another aortic aneurysm case.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I will also ensure that your Report is considered by the Working group led by the National Clinical Director for Diagnostics, in their current review of another Coroner’s case involving aortic aneurysms, so that any recommendations take this case into account.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-NHS-Engalnd
Page 2 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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

The AAA screening programme remains limited to men aged 65 because evidence indicates abdominal aortic aneurysms are very rare in women.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In your report you raised a number of concerns relating to the content of the ultrasound reports. I thought it may be helpful to explain that aortic aneurysms can be difficult to diagnose and treat in a timely fashion, as they are largely asymptomatic. A national screening programme is currently in place for the detection of abdominal aortic aneurysms (“AAA”), but it only invites men aged 65 years. As with all national screening programmes, this decision is based on the best available evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness. As AAAs are very rare in women, they are not currently included in this screening programme.”

Source location

2017-0356-Response-by-NHS-Engalnd
Page 1 · response
Published 11 February 2018

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
3/3

Data last updated 7 September 2026