PFD report

Paula Elizabeth ELSLEY · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 6 Feb 2024•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
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
3

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 raised2

  1. Failure to record and highlight patients' current or former smoking status in an immediately accessible manner
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to keep historical risk information accessible for later risk assessmentPart of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
  2. Failure to routinely apply and formally disseminate the NICE guideline thresholds for chest x-ray referral
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable chest X-ray referral and ordering
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

    Reinforced clinical guidance to consider chest X-rays for persistent respiratory symptoms, repeated antibiotics and smoking history.

    Stated by Ringmead Medical GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 July 2024.
  2. Action

    Circulated the chest X-ray assessment information to locum GPs.

    Stated by Ringmead Medical GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 July 2024.
  3. Action

    Clarified how clinicians should check and document smoking status using the patient care history during consultations.

    Stated by Ringmead Medical GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 July 2024.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    A written practice guideline for chest X-ray requests was difficult because the decision requires individual clinical assessment.

    Stated by Ringmead Medical GroupUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant 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 record and highlight patients' current or former smoking status in an immediately accessible manner

Wider context from the report

“1. Smoking status During the inquest I heard evidence that a patient's smoking status (current or former) was not routinely recorded by the GP practice in a manner that was immediately accessible when reviewing the medical records. I heard that it may be necessary to search through consultation notes and other records to discover this information and GPs do not necessarily have time to do so. A patient's current or former smoking status is relevant information for a GP considering whether a chest x-ray ought to be considered in line with NICE guideline entitled 'Suspected cancer: recognition and referral' (NG12). The GPs who gave evidence agreed that it would be helpful if this information was flagged and the GP practice has indicated that it intends to introduce such a system. However this is not yet in place and I am concerned that the risk of this information not being highlighted remains a current risk. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to keep historical risk information accessible for later risk assessment; 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 routinely apply and formally disseminate the NICE guideline thresholds for chest x-ray referral

Wider context from the report

“2. Thresholds for referral for a chest xray Based on evidence heard at inquest I am concerned that at the time of Paula's death (March 2022) the same NICE guideline was not being routinely considered by GPs. I was very pleased to hear that the practice subsequently introduced their own internal tool for complying if the threshold for a chest x-ray had been reached and that this has been discussed at GP and partner meetings. However some 22 months have now elapsed since Paula's death and no formal policy has been prepared. I remain concerned that the risk of the guideline not being considered remains whilst the change is procedure is informal, especially when it needs to be disseminated to new or locum GPs and other healthcare professionals such as nurses, paramedics and physician associates. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable chest X-ray referral and ordering.

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

Reinforced clinical guidance to consider chest X-rays for persistent respiratory symptoms, repeated antibiotics and smoking history.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The second issue of concern was having a low threshold for conducting a Chest X ray in patients presenting with an ongoing cough or respiratory symptoms. Again, this was discussed in detail in the clinical meetings, guidelines issued by NICE was stressed upon. It is difficult to have a written guideline in the practice about when to request a chest X ray as one needs to assess the patient clinically, but we have stressed that persistent respiratory symptoms, and multiple courses of antibiotics (more than twice) especially in a smoker should prompt the need to carry out a chest X-ray. The clinical meeting is also attended by the Allied health professionals who are regularly involved with seeing patients with respiratory symptoms.”

Source location

Response from Ringmead Medical Group
Page 1 · response
Published 4 July 2024

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

Circulated the chest X-ray assessment information to locum GPs.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The second issue of concern was having a low threshold for conducting a Chest X ray in patients presenting with an ongoing cough or respiratory symptoms. Again, this was discussed in detail in the clinical meetings, guidelines issued by NICE was stressed upon. It is difficult to have a written guideline in the practice about when to request a chest X ray as one needs to assess the patient clinically, but we have stressed that persistent respiratory symptoms, and multiple courses of antibiotics (more than twice) especially in a smoker should prompt the need to carry out a chest X-ray. The clinical meeting is also attended by the Allied health professionals who are regularly involved with seeing patients with respiratory symptoms.”

Source location

Response from Ringmead Medical Group
Page 1 · response
Published 4 July 2024

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

Clarified how clinicians should check and document smoking status using the patient care history during consultations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following the inquest we (all the partners) discussed in detail about the concerns expressed during the inquest. We discussed about easy visibility of the patient's smoking status which would be very useful during consultation. We considered the possibility of making the smoking status visible immediately when the patient's notes were opened but due to IT issues concerning more than 42000 patients that was thought not to be feasible but is easily visible when looking at care history. The issues were discussed in detail in partner's meeting and subsequent clinical meeting which is usually attended by all clinicians. We discussed about the need for checking and documenting smoking status and went through details regarding how to find it in the patient's notes easily (care history page).”

Source location

Response from Ringmead Medical Group
Page 1 · response
Published 4 July 2024

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

A written practice guideline for chest X-ray requests was difficult because the decision requires individual clinical assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The second issue of concern was having a low threshold for conducting a Chest X ray in patients presenting with an ongoing cough or respiratory symptoms. Again, this was discussed in detail in the clinical meetings, guidelines issued by NICE was stressed upon. It is difficult to have a written guideline in the practice about when to request a chest X ray as one needs to assess the patient clinically, but we have stressed that persistent respiratory symptoms, and multiple courses of antibiotics (more than twice) especially in a smoker should prompt the need to carry out a chest X-ray. The clinical meeting is also attended by the Allied health professionals who are regularly involved with seeing patients with respiratory symptoms.”

Source location

Response from Ringmead Medical Group
Page 1 · response
Published 4 July 2024

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

Immediate visibility of smoking status when opening patient notes was not feasible because of IT issues affecting more than 42,000 patients.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following the inquest we (all the partners) discussed in detail about the concerns expressed during the inquest. We discussed about easy visibility of the patient's smoking status which would be very useful during consultation. We considered the possibility of making the smoking status visible immediately when the patient's notes were opened but due to IT issues concerning more than 42000 patients that was thought not to be feasible but is easily visible when looking at care history. The issues were discussed in detail in partner's meeting and subsequent clinical meeting which is usually attended by all clinicians. We discussed about the need for checking and documenting smoking status and went through details regarding how to find it in the patient's notes easily (care history page).”

Source location

Response from Ringmead Medical Group
Page 1 · response
Published 4 July 2024

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