PFD report

John William Pearce · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 25 Feb 2019•Inner North 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
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
14

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. Overreliance on patient refusal of hospital care despite difficulty expressing himself
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe management of refusal of necessary care or protective action
  2. Insufficient district nursing attendances after increased visit frequency was identified as necessary
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate district nursing wound care
  3. Failure to share wound photographs for timely escalation decisions
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate district nursing wound carePart of recurring concern: Unreliable inter-agency information sharing for coordinated care
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.12

  1. Action

    Oversee reassessment of wound-care competence for all relevant staff.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 2 June 2019.
  2. Action

    Cascade a Trust-wide clinical message reminding community nursing teams about wound policy, consent, capacity, and escalation requirements.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 2 June 2019.
  3. Action

    Share learning from the case and work with Whittington NHS Trust to improve wound-care planning and visit-frequency decisions.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 2 June 2019.

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

  1. Position

    Automatic sharing of all wound photographs with every GP is not considered practical or necessary; photographs will be shared during deterioration escalation.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustExisting 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

Overreliance on patient refusal of hospital care despite difficulty expressing himself

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned that: (a) There was no clear instruction, protocol or system which assists nursing staff in dealing with elderly patients who suffer from open wounds which worsen over time, as to when the emergency services should be contacted. It is clear that the staff were following a Tissue Viability Nurse care plan, but no-one appeared to recognise the severity of the injury and the fact that tendons and bone were exposed; (b) There were insufficient attendances on Mr Pearce by the District Nurse Team when it appeared to be decided that he would be visited at more frequent intervals; (c) Too much emphasis was placed on Mr Pearce’s own view that he did not like hospitals and did not want to go there, even though he was noted to be an individual who had difficulty expressing himself; (d) There was no clear evidence that photographs taken of the wound were shared with other agencies or the deceased’s GP, such that another view could be taken of those wounds so as to consider whether the emergency services should become involved as a matter of urgency. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe management of refusal of necessary care or protective action.

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 attendances after increased visit frequency was identified as necessary

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned that: (a) There was no clear instruction, protocol or system which assists nursing staff in dealing with elderly patients who suffer from open wounds which worsen over time, as to when the emergency services should be contacted. It is clear that the staff were following a Tissue Viability Nurse care plan, but no-one appeared to recognise the severity of the injury and the fact that tendons and bone were exposed; (b) There were insufficient attendances on Mr Pearce by the District Nurse Team when it appeared to be decided that he would be visited at more frequent intervals; (c) Too much emphasis was placed on Mr Pearce’s own view that he did not like hospitals and did not want to go there, even though he was noted to be an individual who had difficulty expressing himself; (d) There was no clear evidence that photographs taken of the wound were shared with other agencies or the deceased’s GP, such that another view could be taken of those wounds so as to consider whether the emergency services should become involved as a matter of urgency. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate district nursing wound care.

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 share wound photographs for timely escalation decisions

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned that: (a) There was no clear instruction, protocol or system which assists nursing staff in dealing with elderly patients who suffer from open wounds which worsen over time, as to when the emergency services should be contacted. It is clear that the staff were following a Tissue Viability Nurse care plan, but no-one appeared to recognise the severity of the injury and the fact that tendons and bone were exposed; (b) There were insufficient attendances on Mr Pearce by the District Nurse Team when it appeared to be decided that he would be visited at more frequent intervals; (c) Too much emphasis was placed on Mr Pearce’s own view that he did not like hospitals and did not want to go there, even though he was noted to be an individual who had difficulty expressing himself; (d) There was no clear evidence that photographs taken of the wound were shared with other agencies or the deceased’s GP, such that another view could be taken of those wounds so as to consider whether the emergency services should become involved as a matter of urgency. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate district nursing wound care; Unreliable inter-agency information sharing for coordinated care.

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 clear escalation instructions for worsening open wounds

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned that: (a) There was no clear instruction, protocol or system which assists nursing staff in dealing with elderly patients who suffer from open wounds which worsen over time, as to when the emergency services should be contacted. It is clear that the staff were following a Tissue Viability Nurse care plan, but no-one appeared to recognise the severity of the injury and the fact that tendons and bone were exposed; (b) There were insufficient attendances on Mr Pearce by the District Nurse Team when it appeared to be decided that he would be visited at more frequent intervals; (c) Too much emphasis was placed on Mr Pearce’s own view that he did not like hospitals and did not want to go there, even though he was noted to be an individual who had difficulty expressing himself; (d) There was no clear evidence that photographs taken of the wound were shared with other agencies or the deceased’s GP, such that another view could be taken of those wounds so as to consider whether the emergency services should become involved as a matter of urgency. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate wound management for deteriorating wounds; Unreliable escalation policy for care concerns.

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

Oversee reassessment of wound-care competence for all relevant staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“All of our district nurses complete annual refresher training on wound care management. There is a competency framework in place for health care assistants and district nurse team leaders are responsible for ensuring that their staff are competent. In light of these findings, the Lead Nurse will oversee a programme for reassessment of competence and this will be completed for all staff by 1 June 2019.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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 a Trust-wide clinical message reminding community nursing teams about wound policy, consent, capacity, and escalation requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition, a Trust-wide clinical message will be cascaded out to all community nursing teams reminding them of the policy requirements, consent and capacity and escalation processes.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Share learning from the case and work with Whittington NHS Trust to improve wound-care planning and visit-frequency decisions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Whittington NHS Trust currently provide the specialist tissue viability service for complex wounds to Camden residents and were directly involved in the care delivered to Mr Pearce. As the specialist service, they advise our district nursing teams on the wound care plan and frequency of visits. We are therefore sharing, and working together, with the Whittington NHS Trust in the learning from this case.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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 the Lower Limb and Leg Ulcer Management Policy to standardize wound management and escalation across the Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“CNWL has a Lower Limb and Leg Ulcer Management Policy which was published in October 2018 and gives detailed instructions on the management of lower limb wounds, including traumatic non healing wounds as seen in this case. The purpose of the policy is to standardise lower limb and leg ulcer management strategies across the Trust in accordance with NICE (2016), Best Practice Statement (2016) and RCN (2006) guidance.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Reinforce the wound policy, escalation responsibilities, emergency-services role, qualified-nurse attendance, reassessment, and risk-factor management with the involved team.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is completely unacceptable that this policy was not consistently adhered to by the staff involved in Mr Pearce’s care. In response to this, the Divisional Director of Nursing and the Inner London Lead Nurse met with the team involved in this gentleman’s care on 19 March 2019 to discuss the findings of the PFD, reiterate the policy and assess any further support required in ensuring the above policy is followed in the future.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Tighten formal, regular mental-capacity assessment and accurate recording when consequential treatment decisions are made.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are tightening our process for ensuring that there is formal and regular mental capacity assessment at the point that treatment decisions of consequence are being made and recorded accurately in our clinical records.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Share case learning through the clinical-message process, a learning event, and the Pressure Ulcer Board.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As identified above, the learning from this case will be shared across the Trust as part of our “clinical message of the week” process during the next month. The case will also be shared at a planned learning event with staff, GP and colleagues from Whittington Health on 9 May 2019.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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 bespoke community training on capacity, best interests, and supporting clinical documentation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“During May our Safeguarding Adults lead will also be providing additional bespoke training for capacity and best interest in community settings including supporting clinicians with necessary documentation.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Retrain team members to use the NEWS2 tool for identifying deterioration and seeking emergency help.

Verbatim wording from the response

“CNWL has a deteriorating patient policy which identifies actions staff need to take to identify when patients clinical condition changes. The policy requires that staff in adult services use the National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) tool which directs staff to seek emergency help. CNWL will re-train members of the team in the use of this tool by the end of May 2019.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Consider adapting existing Mental Capacity Act training to support capacity and best-interests decisions when patients decline appropriate care.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This case has highlighted the difficulties of safely managing patients who decline care against clinical advice. In cases where health workers believe the patient is making unwise decisions against hospital admission and more frequent visits in his/her own home, we provide specific safeguarding advice and will now consider how best to adapt our existing Mental Capacity Act (MCA) training to support the application of the MCA, and best interests need to be made on each occasion when the patient is declining appropriate clinical care.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Reinforce secure sharing of photographs and other information about deteriorating wounds with specialist services and GPs during escalation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Due to the GPs using a different recording system (EMIS), the GP would not automatically be able to access the photographs. We recognise that it is not practical or necessary to share all photographs of wounds automatically with every GP. As part of the escalation where a patient’s condition is seen to be deteriorating, the requirement for sharing information, including photographs, is expected and would take place via secure email. This has been reinforced to our staff as part of the meeting in March and will be again reinforced at the follow up session in May.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Hold a follow-up meeting to assess embedded learning and systematic identification of deteriorating patients at handovers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“A further follow up meeting is planned with the team on 3 May 2019 to assess how the team have embedded learning from this incident to date including their local processes for ensuring that at handovers, deteriorating patients are identified in a systematic manner.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 2 June 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

Automatic sharing of all wound photographs with every GP is not considered practical or necessary; photographs will be shared during deterioration escalation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Photographic evidence was regularly taken and consent to photography was recorded with all photographs being uploaded to the clinical recording system (Systmone). The process already in place ensures that any photographs can be reviewed by the Whittington NHS Trust who currently provides the specialist tissue viability service to Camden residents and were involved in the care delivered. As mentioned above, we are working with the Whittington to address the learning from this case and are due to meet with them on 9th May as highlighted above.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

    Oversee a three-month action plan embedding the required team improvements and report its outcomes to the Divisional Board.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 2 June 2019.
  2. 2

    Audit sampled community-service notes during each peer review for documentation completeness and accuracy.

    Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 2 June 2019.

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

Oversee a three-month action plan embedding the required team improvements and report its outcomes to the Divisional Board.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Lead Nurse will oversee a 3 month action plan to ensure that the improvements required, as outlined above, are embedded in this team. She will be required to formally report back, at the end of the 3 month period to the Divisional Board as part of our assurance process.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 2 June 2019

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

Audit sampled community-service notes during each peer review for documentation completeness and accuracy.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We already run regular peer reviews across community services. As part of this process, we will also now ensure that on each peer review, a sample of notes is audited to assess completeness and accuracy of documentation.”

Source location

2019-0068-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 2 June 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