PFD report

Tillie SPENCER-ADAMS · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 5 Sep 2019•Hertfordshire

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

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 raised1

  1. Failure to identify serious injuries following road traffic collisions
    Part of recurring concern: Failure of head injury assessment and treatment pathways to reliably recognise and manage head injuriesPart of recurring concern: Failure to reliably assess and diagnose injuriesPart of recurring concern: Unreliable activation of trauma response for serious injuries
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.1

  1. Action

    Review the care provided on 4 May 2018.

    Stated by East and North Hertfordshire Teaching NHS TrustStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 22 November 2019.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Clinical findings did not require head or forearm imaging; assessment and national guidance supported no further investigation.

    Stated by East and North Hertfordshire Teaching NHS TrustDisputes 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

Failure to identify serious injuries following road traffic collisions

Wider context from the report

“(1) On the 4/5/18 the deceased attended the Lister Hospital following a road traffic collision in which she is likely to have suffered serious injuries (fractures and head injuries) which appear to have been overlooked. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure of head injury assessment and treatment pathways to reliably recognise and manage head injuries; Failure to reliably assess and diagnose injuries; Unreliable activation of trauma response for serious injuries.

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

Review the care provided on 4 May 2018.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The contents of your letter were of grave concern to me and therefore I asked ████████ Clinical Director for Paediatrics, to review the care provided when Tillie attended on 4th May 2018.”

Source location

2019-0356-Response-by-East-and-North-Hertfordshire-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 22 November 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

Clinical findings did not require head or forearm imaging; assessment and national guidance supported no further investigation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Whilst the triage nurse in ED noted a red mark on Tillie’s head, this was not observed by either the Paediatric doctors who reviewed her, nor any of the Paediatric nurses. In addition, Tillie did not exhibit any red-flag symptoms indicative of a head injury. Thus, in line with NICE Guidance, there was no indication to perform a CT head scan. Equally there were no external signs of any injury to her right forearm, nor did Tillie appear to be in any discomfort whilst in ED or the Paediatric unit. She did not require any analgesia and the medical records indicate that she was settled throughout.”

Source location

2019-0356-Response-by-East-and-North-Hertfordshire-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 22 November 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