Rex Brook Hall · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 29 Nov 2016•Birmingham and Solihull

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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
3

Described in responses

Recipients and published 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 raised3

  1. Failure of paramedic foundation training to cover arm pain as an atypical sign of myocardial infarction
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate paramedic training for safe emergency assessment and treatment
  2. Lack of formal testing of paramedics’ 12-lead ECG interpretation
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable ECG use and interpretation for clinical decisionsPart of recurring concern: Unreliable interpretation of cardiac electrical recordings
  3. Failure by paramedics to identify obvious ST elevation

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.3

  1. Health and Care Professions Council

    Review the paramedic standards of proficiency for possible amendments addressing the concerns raised.

  2. Health and Care Professions Council

    Liaise with the College of Paramedics about whether the paramedic standards of proficiency should be amended.

  3. Health and Care Professions Council

    Apply the raised degree-level threshold for entry to the paramedic register from September 2021.

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 paramedic foundation training to cover arm pain as an atypical sign of myocardial infarction

Wider context from the report

“That there may be deficiencies in the foundation training of paramedics: 1. one of the paramedics who qualified in 2015 after a 2 year foundation degree gave evidence that he had never had any formal testing on interpretation of 12 lead ECG; 2. the same paramedic gave evidence that he was not aware from his training that arm pain is a recognised, albeit, atypical sign of myocardial infarction; and 3. two paramedics did not identify obvious ST elevation (the other paramedic completed a diploma in paramedic science in August 2012). ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate paramedic training for safe emergency assessment and treatment.

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 formal testing of paramedics’ 12-lead ECG interpretation

Wider context from the report

“That there may be deficiencies in the foundation training of paramedics: 1. one of the paramedics who qualified in 2015 after a 2 year foundation degree gave evidence that he had never had any formal testing on interpretation of 12 lead ECG; 2. the same paramedic gave evidence that he was not aware from his training that arm pain is a recognised, albeit, atypical sign of myocardial infarction; and 3. two paramedics did not identify obvious ST elevation (the other paramedic completed a diploma in paramedic science in August 2012). ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable ECG use and interpretation for clinical decisions; Unreliable interpretation of cardiac electrical recordings.

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 by paramedics to identify obvious ST elevation

Wider context from the report

“That there may be deficiencies in the foundation training of paramedics: 1. one of the paramedics who qualified in 2015 after a 2 year foundation degree gave evidence that he had never had any formal testing on interpretation of 12 lead ECG; 2. the same paramedic gave evidence that he was not aware from his training that arm pain is a recognised, albeit, atypical sign of myocardial infarction; and 3. two paramedics did not identify obvious ST elevation (the other paramedic completed a diploma in paramedic science in August 2012). ”

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

Review the paramedic standards of proficiency for possible amendments addressing the concerns raised.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The SOPs for paramedics set out the knowledge, skills and abilities individuals must meet and maintain to register with us, and practice safely and effectively as a paramedic. These standards have been revised periodically, to ensure they remain relevant to current practice for the paramedic profession. In relation to the specific points regarding the training of the paramedics in question, the SOPs for paramedics include specific reference to the need for paramedics to:”

Source location

Response-by-HCPC
Page 2 · response
Published 19 February 2017

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

Liaise with the College of Paramedics about whether the paramedic standards of proficiency should be amended.

Verbatim wording from the response

“that all individuals are deemed eligible to apply with us for registration. Once registered, all registrants must continue to maintain their adherence to these standards to remain on the register, including showing evidence of their continuing professional development if audited. We are currently undertaking a review of the SOPs and will liaise with the College of Paramedics on the concerns raised in your report to explore whether any amendments should be made in this regard.”

Source location

Response-by-HCPC
Page 3 · response
Published 19 February 2017

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 raised degree-level threshold for entry to the paramedic register from September 2021.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We note the concerns raised regarding foundation level training for paramedics. We have taken significant steps with the sector to support the development of paramedic practice. In particular, in March 2018 we determined it necessary to raise the threshold level of entry to the Register to degree level (levels 6/9/10 on the relevant UK qualifications frameworks). The threshold level for entry to the Register for paramedics was changed to degree level for the following reasons:”

Source location

Response-by-HCPC
Page 1 · response
Published 19 February 2017

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