Darren Jones · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 17 Jul 2022•Manchester South

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
7

Described in responses

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 raised5

  1. Failure to establish responsibility for catheter-care training
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable management of urinary catheters
  2. Failure to recognise significant learning difficulties in hospital
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to recognise learning disabilities and associated support needs in healthcare
  3. Insufficient District Nursing Team staffing capacity for caseload demand
    Part of recurring concern: Insufficient district nursing staffing capacity

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.7

  1. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Provide documentation feedback to nurses and share standards across the Stockport District Nursing Service.

  2. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Cascade shared learning from this and similar cases to professionals through governance and learning forums.

  3. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Present and share learning from the case with the Greater Manchester System Quality Group.

  4. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Review 10 patient records monthly to monitor documentation standards.

  5. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Monitor key learning points and recommendations to ensure they become embedded in practice.

  6. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Provide safeguarding supervision and feed learning from the episode back to the Victoria Nursing Team.

  7. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Remind staff of the appropriate hospital admission pathway for patients requiring admission after failed catheter insertion.

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

  1. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    The case findings were attributed to individual practice and awareness rather than District Nursing Service pressures, although wider pressures may have contributed.

    Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
  2. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    The LeDeR review was held under national and regional guidance during the inquest, and no coroner-requested review was received.

    Unable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
  3. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    Existing safeguarding processes for patients with learning difficulties are considered robust, despite failing on this occasion.

    Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
  4. NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board

    The dispute between local authorities over catheter-care training and respite provision is for those local authorities to address.

    Redirects 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

Failure to establish responsibility for catheter-care training

Wider context from the report

“3. The Inquest heard that there was a dispute between two Local Authorities regarding training in catheter care. This impacted the provision of respite care and his health and wellbeing; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable management of urinary catheters.

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 recognise significant learning difficulties in hospital

Wider context from the report

“2. Mr Jones had significant learning difficulties which were not fully recognised at the hospital to ensure that he was provided with support and that an IMCA was put in place to ensure his best interests were met. The Inquest heard evidence that it was important that all clinicians and health care professionals were clear and understood how to effectively support someone with a learning disability to ensure they were given the best and most appropriate care; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to recognise learning disabilities and associated support needs in healthcare.

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

Insufficient District Nursing Team staffing capacity for caseload demand

Wider context from the report

“1. The Inquest heard that delivering care in the community to Mr Jones in relation to his catheter care was impacted by the significant demands on the District Nursing Team due to their staffing levels against their caseload. The evidence was that the District Nursing Teams were under significant pressure which impacted the support and care they could deliver; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Insufficient district nursing staffing capacity.

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 put an IMCA in place to safeguard best interests

Wider context from the report

“2. Mr Jones had significant learning difficulties which were not fully recognised at the hospital to ensure that he was provided with support and that an IMCA was put in place to ensure his best interests were met. The Inquest heard evidence that it was important that all clinicians and health care professionals were clear and understood how to effectively support someone with a learning disability to ensure they were given the best and most appropriate care; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable best-interests decision-making processes.

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 commission a LeDeR review

Wider context from the report

“4. No LeDeR appeared to have been commissioned on the evidence before the Inquest. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable morbidity and mortality review processes.

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 documentation feedback to nurses and share standards across the Stockport District Nursing Service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The locality has confirmed that 1:1 feedback has been given to all of the nurses involved in ████████ standards of documentation shared across the Stockport District Nursing Service during daily huddles, team meetings, ‘message of the week’ and the divisional lessons learnt newsletter.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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

Cascade shared learning from this and similar cases to professionals through governance and learning forums.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions taken or being taken to share learning across Greater Manchester.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 3 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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

Present and share learning from the case with the Greater Manchester System Quality Group.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions taken or being taken to share learning across Greater Manchester.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 3 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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 10 patient records monthly to monitor documentation standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The team has been reminded of the importance of accurate and timely completion of all patient records and there is now a monthly review of 10 sets of notes to ensure that standards are achieved and maintained.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 1 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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

Monitor key learning points and recommendations to ensure they become embedded in practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In conclusion, key learning points and recommendations will be monitored to ensure they are embedded within practice. NHS GM is committed to improving outcomes for the population of Greater Manchester.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 3 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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 safeguarding supervision and feed learning from the episode back to the Victoria Nursing Team.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response to this omission, arrangements were made for safeguarding supervision for the specific purpose of learning from this episode of care and to ensure improvement across the team. The learnings here have been fed back to the whole of the Victoria Nursing Team.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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

Remind staff of the appropriate hospital admission pathway for patients requiring admission after failed catheter insertion.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Referral into hospital In circumstance where a patient is transferred to Stockport NHS Foundation Trust (Stepping Hill Hospital) due to failed catheter insertion, the correct pathway is for the patient to be admitted and reviewed within the Surgical Assessment Unit (SAU) as opposed to the Emergency Department. In this case Mr. Jones was referred into the Emergency Department which was not the appropriate pathway for him.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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 case findings were attributed to individual practice and awareness rather than District Nursing Service pressures, although wider pressures may have contributed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response to the general question of pressures within the District Nursing Service, there are pressures across the system including district nursing services. However, the findings in this case were identified to be around individual practice and awareness as opposed to being due to pressures. That said, it can be realistically accepted that wider pressures may have had an impact.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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 LeDeR review was held under national and regional guidance during the inquest, and no coroner-requested review was received.

Verbatim wording from the response

“No LeDeR Report appeared to have been commissioned in relation to Mr. Jones A LeDeR notification had been made to the system in respect of Mr. Darren Jones. The review was put on 'hold' as per national and regional guidance as the case was being heard at inquest.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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

Existing safeguarding processes for patients with learning difficulties are considered robust, despite failing on this occasion.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are satisfied that there is a robust process in place for the support of patients with learning difficulties but acknowledge that the process failed on this occasion which is highly regrettable. Appropriate steps have been taken to ensure wider team awareness for the benefit of future patients.”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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 dispute between local authorities over catheter-care training and respite provision is for those local authorities to address.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The inquest heard that there was a dispute between two local authorities in relation to training re catheter care and that this impacted on the provision of respite care and the health and wellbeing of Mr. Jones This is a matter for the local authorities involved to address; what can be confirmed is that the District Nursing Team are trained in catheter care”

Source location

Response from NHS Greater Manchester
Page 2 · response
Published 27 September 2022

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