PFD report

Edward England Rhodes · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 1 Aug 2023•Dorset

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
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
9

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. Breakdown in communication about the steps and responsibilities for Mental Health referral
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable mental health referral pathways
  2. Failure to send a letter confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable mental health referral pathways
  3. Absence of an automatic Mental Health referral pathway after 90 days of sobriety
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable mental health referral pathways
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.3

  1. Action

    Continue providing patients with written safety-netting information through AccuRx.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  2. Action

    Obtained current CMHT referral pathways, Pan Dorset guidance and integrated community mental-health procedures.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  3. Action

    Met system patient-safety and mental-health representatives to discuss referral matters and criteria.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.

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

  1. Position

    The Practice considers the hepatologist’s written communication to the patient sufficient and will not routinely send reminder letters about requesting referrals.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Breakdown in communication about the steps and responsibilities for Mental Health referral

Wider context from the report

“2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be an apparent breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding between GP and patient as to what steps needed to be taken and by whom in order for there to a Mental Health referral. ii. Reliance appears to have been placed on verbal discussions during consultation and in circumstances where the patent is an addict. iii. There does not appear to be a system where there would be an automatic referral by the GP to the Mental Health team after a 90 day period of sobriety unless the patient “opted out” or where following an automatic referral it is left to the Mental Health team to seek the co operation of the patient. iv. There does not appear to be a letter sent by the surgery confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable mental health referral pathways.

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 send a letter confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient

Wider context from the report

“2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be an apparent breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding between GP and patient as to what steps needed to be taken and by whom in order for there to a Mental Health referral. ii. Reliance appears to have been placed on verbal discussions during consultation and in circumstances where the patent is an addict. iii. There does not appear to be a system where there would be an automatic referral by the GP to the Mental Health team after a 90 day period of sobriety unless the patient “opted out” or where following an automatic referral it is left to the Mental Health team to seek the co operation of the patient. iv. There does not appear to be a letter sent by the surgery confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable mental health referral pathways.

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

Absence of an automatic Mental Health referral pathway after 90 days of sobriety

Wider context from the report

“2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be an apparent breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding between GP and patient as to what steps needed to be taken and by whom in order for there to a Mental Health referral. ii. Reliance appears to have been placed on verbal discussions during consultation and in circumstances where the patent is an addict. iii. There does not appear to be a system where there would be an automatic referral by the GP to the Mental Health team after a 90 day period of sobriety unless the patient “opted out” or where following an automatic referral it is left to the Mental Health team to seek the co operation of the patient. iv. There does not appear to be a letter sent by the surgery confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable mental health referral pathways.

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

Reliance on verbal discussions during consultations with patients with addiction

Wider context from the report

“2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be an apparent breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding between GP and patient as to what steps needed to be taken and by whom in order for there to a Mental Health referral. ii. Reliance appears to have been placed on verbal discussions during consultation and in circumstances where the patent is an addict. iii. There does not appear to be a system where there would be an automatic referral by the GP to the Mental Health team after a 90 day period of sobriety unless the patient “opted out” or where following an automatic referral it is left to the Mental Health team to seek the co operation of the patient. iv. There does not appear to be a letter sent by the surgery confirming the respective responsibilities of the doctor and patient. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Continue providing patients with written safety-netting information through AccuRx.

Verbatim wording from the response

“At this time the Practice were already using AccuRx to provide written safety netting information to patients. However, in this instance, the conversation was between the hepatology consultant and the patient, with the Practice/GP never involved in the mental health/CMHT discussion.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 5 · response
Published 4 August 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

Obtained current CMHT referral pathways, Pan Dorset guidance and integrated community mental-health procedures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.2. The Practice have sought and obtained copies of the CMHT referral pathways from the Integrated Service Manager for Bournemouth East CMHT, the “Pan Dorset Guidance/Process” and “Integrated Community Mental Health Team Procedures” copies of which are attached. These had not previously been provided to the Practice. These were requested on 9 August 2023 and obtained on 10 August 2023. The CMHT’s referral criteria does not specify a requirement for 90 days’ abstinence.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 6 · response
Published 4 August 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

Met system patient-safety and mental-health representatives to discuss referral matters and criteria.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.8. By way of follow up meeting on 25 September 2023 ████████ (Practice Manager) and ████████ attended a meeting with ████████████████████ (Patient Safety at Dorchester Hospital and University Hospitals Dorset) ████████ (ICB Transformation Lead), ████████ (Secondary Care Mental Health Service Lead), ████████ (ICB Patient Safety Lead) to discuss matters arising and referral criteria to CMHT. The pertinent discussion points of relevance were:”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 7 · response
Published 4 August 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

The Practice considers the hepatologist’s written communication to the patient sufficient and will not routinely send reminder letters about requesting referrals.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The “discussion” was between the Deceased and his liver specialist and was followed up in writing, by letter dated 18 August 2022 marked as copied to the Deceased. See Response 2. a. above which is reiterated.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 5 · response
Published 4 August 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

The Practice disputes that 90 days’ sobriety was a formal mental health referral rule, describing it as a historic misunderstanding.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.7. Contacted and met with ICB Patient Safety Services on 30 August 2023. Established there is a review underway of the service provision for patients with alcohol dependency but that is still at the fact finding stage and the timeframe for completion is realistically not until the middle of 2024.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 7 · response
Published 4 August 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

The Practice considers automatic referral after abstinence inappropriate and unworkable because relapse or changed mental health needs require review before referral.

Verbatim wording from the response

“iii. There does not appear to be a system where there would be an automatic referral by the GP to the Mental Health team after a 90 day period of sobriety unless the patient “opted out” or where following an automatic referral it is left to the Mental Health team to seek the co operation of the patient.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 5 · response
Published 4 August 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

The Practice disputes that communication broke down or that it miscommunicated the steps required for a mental health referral.

Verbatim wording from the response

“i. There appears to be an apparent breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding between GP and patient as to what steps needed to be taken and by whom in order for there to a Mental Health referral.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 4 · response
Published 4 August 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.6

  1. 1

    Raised the wider referral-system approach with ICB quality and patient-safety leads, seeking clarification about abstinence requirements.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  2. 2

    Reviewed the death circumstances and coroner’s concerns at Partners’ meetings, considering whether practice changes were needed.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  3. 3

    Conducted an unexpected-death analysis and significant event analysis.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  4. 4

    Liaised with the CQC regarding the concerns and wider mental-health referral system.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  5. 5

    Obtained and continued using a mental-health information card for patient signposting.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 August 2023.
  6. 6

    Prepare a shared learning summary jointly with the ICB.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 4 August 2023.

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

  1. 1

    CMHT is responsible for preparing a shorter clinician-facing summary of its referral criteria.

    Stated by the Partners in the PracticeRedirects 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

Raised the wider referral-system approach with ICB quality and patient-safety leads, seeking clarification about abstinence requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.5. Raised the wider system approach with the ICB directly, namely the ICB Quality Lead and Patient Safety Specialist for Dorset, having obtained details from contact with the CQC. Emailed for guidance on addressing the wider system and attempted to clarify whether there is a “90 day abstinence rule” for CMHT referrals.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 7 · response
Published 4 August 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

Reviewed the death circumstances and coroner’s concerns at Partners’ meetings, considering whether practice changes were needed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9. Following the Inquest, and receipt of the Regulation 28 Report, the Practice has also undertaken further extensive steps:”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 6 · response
Published 4 August 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

Conducted an unexpected-death analysis and significant event analysis.

Verbatim wording from the response

“STEPS TAKEN BY THE PRACTICE”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 6 · response
Published 4 August 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

Liaised with the CQC regarding the concerns and wider mental-health referral system.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.4. Liaised with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in response to initial contact from them. The CQC representative planned to raise with the Integrated Care Board (“ICB”) Quality Lead.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 6 · response
Published 4 August 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

Obtained and continued using a mental-health information card for patient signposting.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.6. Following discussion with the ICB communications lead on 3 August 2023, obtained a copy mental health Z card on 17 August 2023, as attached (which the Practice do already have and use but did not have opportunity to give to the Deceased in this case due to lack of mental health contact)”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 7 · response
Published 4 August 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

Prepare a shared learning summary jointly with the ICB.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.8.5 Plan to prepare a shared learning summary jointly with ICB. ICB are already providing mental health Z cards to acute services/A&E departments. CMHT are in the process of constructing an SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) communication tool for acute services detailing criteria for referral to CMHT.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 8 · response
Published 4 August 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

CMHT is responsible for preparing a shorter clinician-facing summary of its referral criteria.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9.8.3 The 90 days’ sobriety has never been a ‘rule’/ referral criteria. It’s likely a historic/misunderstood ‘old wives tale’. Discussed the length of the referral criteria document, which it was agreed was unhelpful for clinicians. CMHT stated this was their policy rather than one aimed for referring clinicians to use. All agreed it would be helpful to have a shorter/punchier summary for clinicians to use going forwards. This will be a matter for CMHT to prepare a revised version.”

Source location

Response from Beaufort Road Surgery
Page 7 · response
Published 4 August 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