PFD report

Ms Cherry Lynne GARLAND · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 8 Sep 2023•Avon

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
9

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. Insufficient pharmacist capacity and medicines reconciliation checking
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable medication reconciliation across care transitions
  2. Failure of hospital medication systems to exchange information, requiring manual transcription during ICU transfers
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processesPart of recurring concern: Unreliable medication reconciliation across care transitions
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.7

  1. Action

    Provide routine training for junior and rotational ward pharmacists receiving intensive-care step-down patients.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2023.
  2. Action

    Apply a doctor’s second check when prescribers complete ward drug charts.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2023.
  3. Action

    Invest in additional adult intensive-care pharmacy staff to provide trained-individual medicines reconciliation five days weekly and weekend safety-net reviews.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 September 2023.

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

  1. Position

    Interoperability between prescribing systems cannot be achieved because it requires technical input from competing external providers outside the Trust’s control.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustUnable 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

Insufficient pharmacist capacity and medicines reconciliation checking

Wider context from the report

“My concerns • I heard evidence from an ICU Consultant (who I found to be both a reliable and an impressive witness), who told me, among other things, that: - “... Transcription errors have always been a problem…” the ideal way to get rid of them would be to have a system [in the rest of the hospital] that speaks to ours - The ICU retains lists of its patients’ medication on a computerised/electronic system - The rest of the wards in the hospital do not operate the same system - The available systems do not speak to each other (to put it in somewhat colloquial terms) - Efforts to address that problem have proved fruitless - As a result, every time an inpatient moves from ICU to another department in the hospital, an appropriately qualified member of staff has to physically transcribe that patient’s medication list - With (for instance) 10 patients moving per day, 15-20 medications per patient, and multiple elements for each medication (name; dose; timing; indication; start date; signature etc.), “at a conservative estimate 1,500 to 2,000 elements [are transcribed daily]” (Coroner’s comment: for obvious reasons this creates enormous potential for human error) - There are a limited number of people who can prescribe (and are therefore able to perform this task); in critical care they are the same people who are responsible for providing care - “We really need a second check… funding for more pharmacists… as a Trust we’re falling short of ICU national standards for years in terms of the number of pharmacists per bed and medicines reconciliation” - “I spoke to the Chief Pharmaceutical Officer – he has submitted 5 proposals in the last 7 years to try to get the deficit funded… [without success]” In summary, my view is that the circumstances currently in place create a very real (and known) risk that transcription errors will continue to occur. This in turn endangers patients, and creates a risk that people will die in the future as a result of such errors. It is, sadly, very easy to envisage circumstances in which a patient might not receive essential medication at all, might receive the wrong dose of the medication they need, or might receive the wrong medication altogether, because of a transcription error. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken, and in the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable medication reconciliation across care transitions.

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 hospital medication systems to exchange information, requiring manual transcription during ICU transfers

Wider context from the report

“My concerns • I heard evidence from an ICU Consultant (who I found to be both a reliable and an impressive witness), who told me, among other things, that: - “... Transcription errors have always been a problem…” the ideal way to get rid of them would be to have a system [in the rest of the hospital] that speaks to ours - The ICU retains lists of its patients’ medication on a computerised/electronic system - The rest of the wards in the hospital do not operate the same system - The available systems do not speak to each other (to put it in somewhat colloquial terms) - Efforts to address that problem have proved fruitless - As a result, every time an inpatient moves from ICU to another department in the hospital, an appropriately qualified member of staff has to physically transcribe that patient’s medication list - With (for instance) 10 patients moving per day, 15-20 medications per patient, and multiple elements for each medication (name; dose; timing; indication; start date; signature etc.), “at a conservative estimate 1,500 to 2,000 elements [are transcribed daily]” (Coroner’s comment: for obvious reasons this creates enormous potential for human error) - There are a limited number of people who can prescribe (and are therefore able to perform this task); in critical care they are the same people who are responsible for providing care - “We really need a second check… funding for more pharmacists… as a Trust we’re falling short of ICU national standards for years in terms of the number of pharmacists per bed and medicines reconciliation” - “I spoke to the Chief Pharmaceutical Officer – he has submitted 5 proposals in the last 7 years to try to get the deficit funded… [without success]” In summary, my view is that the circumstances currently in place create a very real (and known) risk that transcription errors will continue to occur. This in turn endangers patients, and creates a risk that people will die in the future as a result of such errors. It is, sadly, very easy to envisage circumstances in which a patient might not receive essential medication at all, might receive the wrong dose of the medication they need, or might receive the wrong medication altogether, because of a transcription error. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken, and in the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes; Unreliable medication reconciliation across care transitions.

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

Provide routine training for junior and rotational ward pharmacists receiving intensive-care step-down patients.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Apply a doctor’s second check when prescribers complete ward drug charts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Invest in additional adult intensive-care pharmacy staff to provide trained-individual medicines reconciliation five days weekly and weekend safety-net reviews.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• You heard in evidence that proposals for additional resource in Pharmacy were presented but, regrettably, there were competing proposals from higher risk areas, which the Trust had to prioritise. I asked the Chief Medical Officer to oversee a review of the funding requests, and entries on the Trust’s risk register, to provide further assurance around this. I confirm that the Trust will invest in additional pharmacy staff for adult ITU to ensure all medicines reconciliation at step down is completed by a suitably trained individual. This will provide a pharmacy medicines reconciliation five days a week. In addition, this investment will provide a safety net review of weekend medicines reconciliation previously undertaken by doctors and advanced nurse practitioners at the weekend at the time of transfer out of ITU.”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Implement Careflow Medicines Management across most clinical areas to standardise prescribing and support electronic medicines reconciliation and medication-error controls.

Verbatim wording from the response

“For patients in the ward areas of our hospitals, medicines are currently prescribed using paper drug charts. A Trust-wide system for electronic prescribing and medicines administration, Careflow Medicines Management (CMM), for ward based patients is currently being implemented across”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Review pharmacy funding requests and relevant Trust risk-register entries to provide assurance about medicines-reconciliation safety.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• You heard in evidence that proposals for additional resource in Pharmacy were presented but, regrettably, there were competing proposals from higher risk areas, which the Trust had to prioritise. I asked the Chief Medical Officer to oversee a review of the funding requests, and entries on the Trust’s risk register, to provide further assurance around this. I confirm that the Trust will invest in additional pharmacy staff for adult ITU to ensure all medicines reconciliation at step down is completed by a suitably trained individual. This will provide a pharmacy medicines reconciliation five days a week. In addition, this investment will provide a safety net review of weekend medicines reconciliation previously undertaken by doctors and advanced nurse practitioners at the weekend at the time of transfer out of ITU.”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Participate in regional auditing to share learning and identify opportunities to reduce medication errors during intensive-care step-down.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Provide a designated quiet space for medication transcription.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Interoperability between prescribing systems cannot be achieved because it requires technical input from competing external providers outside the Trust’s control.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition, achieving interoperability between the two systems would require extensive technical input from and between the two external competing commercial providers, which would be outside of the Trust’s control.”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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 unified electronic prescribing system cannot be introduced because ward and intensive-care systems have incompatible specialised requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addressing transcription challenges within the different clinical areas of UHBW, it may seem desirable to have a unified prescribing system. However, it’s important to acknowledge that the Electronic Patient Record system used for ward-based patients would not be suitable for use on ITU given the specialised requirements of the Intensive Care system. This challenge is not unique to UHBW; across the NHS, different clinical areas, including ITU, maternity, and pathology, often operate with disparate systems due to their complex, individual requirements.”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

    Deliver pharmacist-led prescribing training during each new-doctor rotation induction.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2023.
  2. 2

    Apply standard analgesic regimen labels routinely for surgical patients.

    Stated by Bristol NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2023.

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

Deliver pharmacist-led prescribing training during each new-doctor rotation induction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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

Apply standard analgesic regimen labels routinely for surgical patients.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions already in place to reduce the risk of transcription errors between ITU and the wards:”

Source location

Response from University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 September 2023

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