PFD report

Allan Davies · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 9 Jul 2019•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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
6

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. Lack of awareness among NHS trusts and ambulance services using NHSP of the overdose-triage deficiency
  2. Failure of NHSP overdose triage to account for drug type and sudden-collapse risk
    Part of recurring concern: Telephone triage that is unreliable and can delay necessary care
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.5

  1. Action

    Write to ambulance service chief executives and medical directors highlighting overdose-triage risks and requesting robust clinical oversight for higher-risk callers.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 October 2019.
  2. Action

    Deploy NHS Pathways Release 18 across NHS 111 and participating ambulance services, including staff updates and system implementation.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 18 October 2019.
  3. Action

    Disseminate information about the new Dx0124 disposition code to NHS Pathways users through the standard deployment process.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 October 2019.

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

  1. Position

    Reclassifying every overdose case as a Category 2 ambulance response would create wider clinical risks and delay responses to patients with greater need.

    Stated by NHS EnglandDisputes 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

Lack of awareness among NHS trusts and ambulance services using NHSP of the overdose-triage deficiency

Wider context from the report

“I heard evidence from a West Midlands Ambulance Service (WMAS) Clinical Standards Manager and Emergency Operations Centre Clinical Manager. They explained that it is recognised certain drugs put overdose patients who are initially breathing and conscious at greater risk of sudden collapse. An example given of the two ends of spectrum was a paracetamol overdose – less risk of sudden collapse – and heroin overdose – greater risk of sudden collapse. However, when an overdose patient calls 999, the NHS Pathways Telephone Triage System (NHSP) does not distinguish between the type of drug(s) taken and the corresponding risk of sudden collapse. If the patient is breathing and conscious at the time of the call, NHSP advises a category 3 response (ambulance within two hours), regardless of the type of drug(s) taken. Both witnesses expressed concern that this is too generic and is placing patients at risk. One of the witnesses sits on the NHSP user group, and added the generic triaging of overdose cases continues despite a number of different NHS trusts sharing the same concern and raising it with NHS Pathways via the user group. WMAS are sufficiently concerned about the on-going concern that in January 2019 they implemented a local policy adding a layer of triaging on top of NHSP to have regard to the type of drug(s) taken and its impact on the patient. My on-going concern is: (1) NHSP triaging of overdose cases is too generic, namely it fails to have regard to the type of drug(s) taken and the potential for sudden collapse in certain patients; (2) Not all NHS trusts/ambulance services that utilise NHSP are aware of this apparent deficiency. ”

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

Failure of NHSP overdose triage to account for drug type and sudden-collapse risk

Wider context from the report

“I heard evidence from a West Midlands Ambulance Service (WMAS) Clinical Standards Manager and Emergency Operations Centre Clinical Manager. They explained that it is recognised certain drugs put overdose patients who are initially breathing and conscious at greater risk of sudden collapse. An example given of the two ends of spectrum was a paracetamol overdose – less risk of sudden collapse – and heroin overdose – greater risk of sudden collapse. However, when an overdose patient calls 999, the NHS Pathways Telephone Triage System (NHSP) does not distinguish between the type of drug(s) taken and the corresponding risk of sudden collapse. If the patient is breathing and conscious at the time of the call, NHSP advises a category 3 response (ambulance within two hours), regardless of the type of drug(s) taken. Both witnesses expressed concern that this is too generic and is placing patients at risk. One of the witnesses sits on the NHSP user group, and added the generic triaging of overdose cases continues despite a number of different NHS trusts sharing the same concern and raising it with NHS Pathways via the user group. WMAS are sufficiently concerned about the on-going concern that in January 2019 they implemented a local policy adding a layer of triaging on top of NHSP to have regard to the type of drug(s) taken and its impact on the patient. My on-going concern is: (1) NHSP triaging of overdose cases is too generic, namely it fails to have regard to the type of drug(s) taken and the potential for sudden collapse in certain patients; (2) Not all NHS trusts/ambulance services that utilise NHSP are aware of this apparent deficiency. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Telephone triage that is unreliable and can delay necessary care.

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

Write to ambulance service chief executives and medical directors highlighting overdose-triage risks and requesting robust clinical oversight for higher-risk callers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response I can confirm that NHS England and NHS Improvement, through the Ambulance Response Programme and Joint Ambulance Improvement Programme Board, are aware of this issue, and have taken steps to address it. On 2nd April 2019 Professor Jonathan Benger, the National Clinical Director for Urgent and Emergency Care at NHS England, wrote to all Ambulance Service Chief Executives and Ambulance Service Medical Directors in England to highlight this issue and ask them to:”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-England
Page 1 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Deploy NHS Pathways Release 18 across NHS 111 and participating ambulance services, including staff updates and system implementation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This new disposition code to support further clinical assessment was finalised and included in Release 18 of NHS Pathways content. Beta testing occurred in August 2019 and widescale deployment of Release 18 to all providers of NHS111 and all ambulance services in England that use the NHS Pathways system begins on 7th October 2019, with services then having an 8 week period to update their staff and deploy in their systems.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 5 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Disseminate information about the new Dx0124 disposition code to NHS Pathways users through the standard deployment process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Through our standard deployment process all users of NHS Pathways are aware of the new disposition code Dx0124 coming in Release 18.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 6 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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 proposed disposition code to identify symptomatic, non-suicidal overdose patients for urgent clinical assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS Pathways has also recognised that those patients who have overdosed without suicidal intent and have symptoms (and so receive a Dx012 disposition and Category 3 ambulance) would benefit from having the same visibility within the Category 3 cohort as those with suicidal intent, so they can also be easily identified by clinicians working within ambulance control rooms for urgent remote clinical assessment of the risk to life. Further work by the NHS Pathways team is commencing in this area and, subject to review by the National Clinical Governance Group, a new disposition code will be introduced (similar to Dx0124) to enable this to occur. The Ambulance Response Programme will be made aware of this proposed change.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 5 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Introduce and ratify disposition code Dx0124 to identify higher-risk suicidal patients for early clinical review.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To support this recommendation NHS Pathways have introduced a new disposition code (Dx0124), ratified by the NHS Pathways National Clinical Governance Group (NCGG) in February 2019. This new code, ‘Dx0124 Emergency Ambulance Response for Risk of Suicide (Category 3)’ is designed to facilitate the early identification of higher risk suicidal patients either following an intentional toxic overdose or persons who intend to end their life by violent means, so that they can undergo early clinical review within 111 and 999 call-handling centres.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 5 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Reclassifying every overdose case as a Category 2 ambulance response would create wider clinical risks and delay responses to patients with greater need.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I can confirm that the re-categorisation of all such cases from Dx012 (Category 3 ambulance) responses to a Category 2 ambulance response, without first differentiating the clinical risks of method, toxicity and social circumstance, was also considered. However given the large volume of low risk patients that would be included in such a change this would also introduce new clinical risks across the wider emergency care system and delay the ambulance response to other patients with greater need. Therefore again the introduction of a new code was felt to be the safest and best option.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-England
Page 2 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Automated identification of higher-risk overdose patients is not currently possible because patients may inaccurately identify the substance or quantity taken.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This letter also offered to promote and share good practice in this regard, which several ambulance services have done. This letter from ████████ followed earlier work to examine whether there might be a way of identifying higher risk overdose patients automatically, given that NHS Pathways is a computer-based system operated by non-clinical call handlers. However unfortunately no such system exists at present, not least because patients who have taken an overdose may not be able to identify accurately the substance or quantity that they have taken, and for this reason active clinical oversight within ambulance control rooms was recommended.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-England
Page 2 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Automatically identifying higher-risk overdose patients from drugs taken is not possible because telephone triage has too many variables for non-clinical call handlers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Overdose cases (whether with suicidal intent or not) are very complex to assess within telephone triage due to different methods, lethality and social circumstances. In overdose cases the capacity of any drug to cause harm is dependent on multiple factors; for example, quantity of drug taken, interactions of other medication, the patient’s medical history and time of overdose, as well as the patient’s understanding of what exactly has been taken.”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 3 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Re-categorising all suicidal cases for faster ambulance responses would offer little benefit and could introduce wider clinical risks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4) Use of disposition Dx012 /Category 3 ambulance response”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 4 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

    Continue reviewing ambulance response categories for suicidal patient groups.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 18 October 2019.

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

  1. 1

    Ambulance response standards and quality indicators are set by NHS England, not NHS Pathways.

    Stated by NHS EnglandRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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

Continue reviewing ambulance response categories for suicidal patient groups.

Verbatim wording from the response

“5) Changes implemented to disposition Dx012”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 4 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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

Ambulance response standards and quality indicators are set by NHS England, not NHS Pathways.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS Pathways dispositions have unique codes, for example Dx012 is the disposition code for a Category 3 emergency ambulance response. Where symptoms require a disposition related to an ambulance needing to be dispatched this is then ‘mapped’ to the clinically appropriate ambulance standards which are set by NHS England and results in the specific disposition code indicating the category of ambulance. NHS Pathways does not set the Ambulance response standards or the Ambulance Quality Indicators and these can be found at https://www.england.nhs.uk/urgent-emergency-care/arp”

Source location

2019-0291-Response-by-NHS-Digital
Page 4 · response
Published 18 October 2019

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