PFD report

Adrian Mark Smith · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 16 Oct 2015•Birmingham and Solihull

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 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 raised1

  1. Failure to follow specialist advice
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical task management and follow-through
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Radiologists need not automatically follow specialist requests because they independently assess clinical need, likely benefit and potential intervention.

    Stated by University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 follow specialist advice

Wider context from the report

“(1) Clear instruction was given by the Queen Elizabeth hospital to undertake an MRI scan to confirm the possible diagnosis. This instruction was not followed by the staff at Good Hope Hospital. Systems need to be put in place to ensure that specialist advice is followed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical task management and follow-through.

Open source report

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

Radiologists need not automatically follow specialist requests because they independently assess clinical need, likely benefit and potential intervention.

Verbatim wording from the response

“1. Clear instruction was given by the Queen Elizabeth Hospital to undertake an MRI scan to confirm the possible diagnosis. This instruction was not followed by the staff at Good Hope Hospital. Systems need to be put in place to ensure that specialist advice is followed.”

Source location

2015-0378-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 16 October 2015

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.4

  1. 1

    Require the consultant radiologist to discuss queried or declined investigations directly with the senior neurosurgeon.

    Stated by University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 16 October 2015.
  2. 2

    Liaise with neurosurgery and divisional leadership so the neurosurgical team is aware of and can approve the proposed process changes.

    Stated by University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 16 October 2015.
  3. 3

    Require a consultant radiologist to obtain a peer consultant’s second opinion before declining a requested radiological investigation.

    Stated by University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 16 October 2015.
  4. 4

    Develop a radiology directorate standard operating procedure setting out the strengthened investigation-decision process.

    Stated by University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 16 October 2015.

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

Require the consultant radiologist to discuss queried or declined investigations directly with the senior neurosurgeon.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. In addition to strengthening the decision making process, if after a peer discussion, both consultant radiologists are of the professional opinion that the investigation should not be undertaken, or an alternative investigation should be undertaken, how this is communicated to the neurosurgical team will change. Currently the process would be that the treating clinical team liaise with the neurosurgical team regarding patient management, and it is the treating clinical team that currently communicate the decision to decline any requested investigation. The process, in future, will be that if the decision is to query the requested investigation then the consultant radiologist will speak directly with the senior neurosurgeon to discuss the case and their clinical decision.”

Source location

2015-0378-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 16 October 2015

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

Liaise with neurosurgery and divisional leadership so the neurosurgical team is aware of and can approve the proposed process changes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In order to facilitate this more collaborative working approach, ████████ has agreed to liaise with the Clinical Lead for Neurosurgery at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, ████████, and the Divisional Director for Division ████████ to ensure that the neurosurgical team are aware of and approve our proposed changes.”

Source location

2015-0378-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 16 October 2015

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

Require a consultant radiologist to obtain a peer consultant’s second opinion before declining a requested radiological investigation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In order that the risk of future events can be reduced the following steps have been taken by the Trust:”

Source location

2015-0378-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 16 October 2015

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

Develop a radiology directorate standard operating procedure setting out the strengthened investigation-decision process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To ensure these actions are consistently applied across the radiology directorate ████████ has agreed to develop a standard operating procedure (SOP) that clearly and concisely articulates the strengthened process.”

Source location

2015-0378-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 16 October 2015

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
1/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026