PFD report

Master Yo Li · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 19 Nov 2020•Surrey

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
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
3

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 raised4

  1. Lack of NHS Trust requirements for internal UVC policies and procedures to comply with BAPM guidance
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe patient cannulationPart of recurring concern: Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance
  2. Lack of NICE guidance on the use of UVCs
  3. Lack of NHS Trust requirements for clinicians to be familiar with BAPM guidance
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe patient cannulation
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.1

  1. Action

    Publish an evidence-based Framework for Practice on neonatal central venous catheter use to reduce complications and support early recognition of extravasation.

    Stated by British Association of Perinatal MedicineStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 December 2020.

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

  1. Position

    Education and training of healthcare professionals is assigned to relevant professional bodies, including the Royal Colleges, GMC and Health Education England.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceRedirects 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

Lack of NHS Trust requirements for internal UVC policies and procedures to comply with BAPM guidance

Wider context from the report

“2. There is no NICE guidance on the use of UVCs and there is no requirement on NHS Trusts to ensure that their clinicians are familiar with the BAPM guidance or to ensure that their internal policies and procedures are in accordance with it. Consideration ought to be given by NHSI to introducing some NICE guidance to cover this issue. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe patient cannulation; Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance.

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 NICE guidance on the use of UVCs

Wider context from the report

“2. There is no NICE guidance on the use of UVCs and there is no requirement on NHS Trusts to ensure that their clinicians are familiar with the BAPM guidance or to ensure that their internal policies and procedures are in accordance with it. Consideration ought to be given by NHSI to introducing some NICE guidance to cover this issue. ”

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 NHS Trust requirements for clinicians to be familiar with BAPM guidance

Wider context from the report

“2. There is no NICE guidance on the use of UVCs and there is no requirement on NHS Trusts to ensure that their clinicians are familiar with the BAPM guidance or to ensure that their internal policies and procedures are in accordance with it. Consideration ought to be given by NHSI to introducing some NICE guidance to cover this issue. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe patient cannulation.

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 of BAPM guidance to identify a key risk factor for mal-positioned UVCs

Wider context from the report

“1. The BAPM guidance on ‘Use of Central Venous Catheters in Neonates – A Framework for Practice’ does not identify a key risk factor for a mal-positioned UVC. Consideration ought to be given by BAPM to updating the guidance to include reference to this risk factor. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe patient cannulation.

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

Publish an evidence-based Framework for Practice on neonatal central venous catheter use to reduce complications and support early recognition of extravasation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Among BAPM’s resources are a series of Frameworks for Practice (FfPs) which, following review of the literature, are written by multi-professional, voluntary working groups and published on our website after national consultation. Our FfPs are therefore evidence-based, consensus documents: specifically they are not guidelines, but as you note, guidance. This makes them highly suitable to inform local guidelines and protocols appropriate for individual neonatal units and/or networks. BAPM FfPs are reviewed regularly and updated if new evidence has become available.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-BAPM-Redacted.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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

Education and training of healthcare professionals is assigned to relevant professional bodies, including the Royal Colleges, GMC and Health Education England.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We consider this an issue of training and awareness. The responsibility for the education and training of healthcare professionals rests with the relevant professional bodies, such as the Royal Colleges, the GMC and Health Education England.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-NICE-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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

NICE considers no direct action necessary at present, while logging the concerns for consideration during the next NG154 update.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While we do not consider that direct action is required from NICE at this time, the concerns you have raised have been logged for further consideration when guideline NG154 is next reviewed for update.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-NICE-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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 BAPM framework is considered sufficient to contain information on UVC insertion and associated risks, so NICE will not produce specific recommendations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We do not consider it appropriate for NICE to produce guideline recommendations specifically describing how to insert UVC lines.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-NICE-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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 suggested amendment requiring NHS Trusts to ensure clinician familiarity with the current BAPM Framework is unnecessary and cannot be guaranteed to prevent recurrence.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While we agree wholeheartedly with your recommendation that there should be a requirement on NHS Trusts to ensure that their clinicians are familiar with the current BAPM FfP for the use of Central Venous Catheters in Neonates, with the greatest of respect we contend that the suggested amendment is unnecessary and could not be guaranteed to prevent a recurrence of the incident described which led to the sad death of Master Yo Li.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-BAPM-Redacted.pdf
Page 3 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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.2

  1. 1

    Log the concerns for consideration in the next review of guideline NG154.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 December 2020.
  2. 2

    Consider the logged concerns when guideline NG154 is next reviewed for update.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 24 December 2020.

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

Log the concerns for consideration in the next review of guideline NG154.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While we do not consider that direct action is required from NICE at this time, the concerns you have raised have been logged for further consideration when guideline NG154 is next reviewed for update.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-NICE-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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

Consider the logged concerns when guideline NG154 is next reviewed for update.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While we do not consider that direct action is required from NICE at this time, the concerns you have raised have been logged for further consideration when guideline NG154 is next reviewed for update.”

Source location

2020-0245-Response-from-NICE-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 24 December 2020

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
2/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026