PFD report

Abdulrahman AlAjmi · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 16 Apr 2025•Inner West London

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
4

Named on the report

Responses found
3

Of 4 recipients

Stated actions
1

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. Absence of systems or structures for safe receipt and treatment of patients arriving in the UK for medical treatment
  2. Lack of a set procedure for UK hospital acceptance of patients from other countries
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable hospital acceptance arrangements for patients requiring treatment
  3. Failure to ensure accurate and updated clinical information for referral acceptance and patient transfer
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes
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.6

  1. Position

    The concerns about procedures for accepting foreign patients fall outside NHS England’s remit.

    Stated by NHS EnglandOutside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

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

Absence of systems or structures for safe receipt and treatment of patients arriving in the UK for medical treatment

Wider context from the report

“5. The evidence showed an absence of systems or structures to ensure that patients arriving in the UK for medical treatment are able to be received (by the ambulance transferring them and the hospital treating them) safely and be properly treated: with a full understanding of the accurate and up to date medical position. ”

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 a set procedure for UK hospital acceptance of patients from other countries

Wider context from the report

“1. In the course of the evidence it was confirmed that there is no set procedure regarding the acceptance by hospitals in the UK of patients for treatment from other countries. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable hospital acceptance arrangements for patients requiring treatment.

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 ensure accurate and updated clinical information for referral acceptance and patient transfer

Wider context from the report

“2. It was stated in evidence that patients often arrive in a substantially different (often worse) condition to that described to the receiving clinicians when they accepted the referral and agreed that they were able to provide treatment. This means that UK health providers may receive for treatment individuals who are more unwell than anticipated, potentially requiring expertise that is not held by the receiving treatment providers (albeit in this case they had an ICU team who were able to provide the necessary treatment). 3. The evidence provided showed that it is up to each individual hospital to determine whether they are willing and able to accept a referral and agree the process for transfer of the patient. The evidence indicated that process is not uniform and relies heavily on the accuracy of the information received from the referring medical staff, as well as it being appropriately updated should circumstances change. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes.

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

The concerns about procedures for accepting foreign patients fall outside NHS England’s remit.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The concerns raised in your Report do not sit within NHS England’s remit. NHS England notes that the Coroner has also addressed your Report to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) who are the more appropriate organisations to respond to your concerns. Where we are able to, NHS England will be happy to support these organisations in addressing the concerns raised.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Acceptance of foreign patients by NHS hospitals is governed by existing local procedures rather than a national procedure.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While we note that, in this case, the receiving hospital was private and not under NHS jurisdiction, it is currently the case that any acceptance of a foreign patient by an NHS hospital would be subject to local procedures. We have therefore ensured that North West London Integrated Care Board (NWL ICB), the host ICB for the London Clinic, are aware of Abdulrahman’s case and the concerns raised in your Report for assurance purposes.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

DHSC and FCDO are identified as the more appropriate organisations to respond to concerns about accepting foreign patients for treatment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The concerns raised in your Report do not sit within NHS England’s remit. NHS England notes that the Coroner has also addressed your Report to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) who are the more appropriate organisations to respond to your concerns. Where we are able to, NHS England will be happy to support these organisations in addressing the concerns raised.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Providers have limited recourse to pursue proceedings against medical professionals based in third countries.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As noted in the report, there is limited recourse for any provider, NHS or independent, to undertake proceedings against a medical professional based in a third country.”

Source location

Response from Department for Health and Social Care
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

Responding to the concern falls outside the respondent’s remit and is instead a matter for the Health Department.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I don't believe a response sits within my remit and seems more for the Health Department [DHSC].”

Source location

Response from FCDO
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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 Health Department should liaise with the referring country’s health team to determine whether travellers are fit to travel.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It’s about people travelling to the UK for medical procedures in a worse condition than anticipated. This would be for [DHSC] to liaise with the Health Team in the country who has sent the referral to determine if they are well enough to travel.”

Source location

Response from FCDO
Page 1 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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

    Discuss received Prevention of Future Deaths reports through the Regulation 28 Working Group and share key learning across national and regional NHS services.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 April 2025.

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

Discuss received Prevention of Future Deaths reports through the Regulation 28 Working Group and share key learning across national and regional NHS services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I would also like to provide further assurances on the national NHS England work taking place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are discussed by the Regulation 28 Working Group, comprising Regional Medical Directors, and other clinical and quality colleagues from across the regions. This ensures that key learnings and insights around events, such as the sad death of Abdulrahman, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us to pay close attention to any emerging trends that may require further review and action.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 2 · response
Published 24 April 2025

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
3/4

Data last updated 7 September 2026