PFD report

Nicholas Hugh Winterton · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 31 Mar 2021•City of 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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
4

Named on the report

Responses found
4

Of 4 recipients

Stated actions
5

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 raised3

  1. Failure to ensure nationally consistent formulation of Mycobacterium Chimaera risk levels
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notification
  2. Failure to keep national Mycobacterium Chimaera risk guidance and web information updated
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notificationPart of recurring concern: Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance
  3. Failure to capture the true incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notification
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.5

  1. Action

    Complete and submit an updated M. chimaera infection risk assessment for publication.

    Stated by College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists and National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research and Public Health England and Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and IrelandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 28 June 2021.
  2. Action

    Further update the risk estimates and publish them by September 2021.

    Stated by College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists and National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research and Public Health England and Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and IrelandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 28 June 2021.
  3. Action

    Cascade updated risk estimates through clinical networks to professionals informing or consenting patients and investigating or diagnosing infections.

    Stated by College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists and National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research and Public Health England and Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and IrelandStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 28 June 2021.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.3

  1. Position

    NHS England is responsible for updating guidance and the NHS website, so the requests will be forwarded to it.

    Stated by College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists and National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research and Public Health England and Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and IrelandRedirects 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 ensure nationally consistent formulation of Mycobacterium Chimaera risk levels

Wider context from the report

“1. It is apparent that it is important that the nationally recognised level of the risk of developing Mycobacterium Chimaera from exposure to a heater cooler unit is accurate, in that it accurately reflects the most current statistical data, and is based on the best gathering of statistical data as to the true incidence of such infection as can practically be achieved. This is because the nationally recognised level of risk is the proper basis upon which – (i) The informed consent of a patient for a relevant surgery is obtained, and (ii) Post-operatively, the patient and the clinician(s) caring for him (including his General Practitioner) will base their “threshold for suspicion” for Mycobacterium Chimaera if the patient develops an infection which cannot quickly be identified and treated. 2. Public Health England, together with the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery, and the College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists, are the national bodies which are able to co-ordinate collation of relevant statistical evidence and then formulate and disseminate accurate information about the level of risk. It is inappropriate for individual hospitals, cardiac centres, or Trusts to formulate risk level on the basis of their own data as this would result, nationally, in the dissemination of inconsistent information. 3. Public Health England’s “Clinical guidance for secondary care” and “Information for general practice” are based on January 2017 data. Further, on its website, under the heading “Who could be at risk of Mycobacterium chimaera infection”, Public Health England currently states, “People most at risk are those who’ve had heart valve surgery since January 2013. About 1 person in every 5,000 who has this type of surgery will develop the infection.” This assessment is also based on data collated to January 2017. 4. The evidence at the inquest showed that the figure of “1 person in every 5,000” is inaccurate, in that : (i) It is based on data from 2017 and not updated data, and (ii) It is based on data which reflects only those patients who are reported to Public Health England as having died of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whereas the true incidence of the infection is very likely to be higher; the likelihood is that there is a potentially significant number of deaths from undiagnosed Mycobacterium Chimaera, given the patient cohort’s usual level of co-morbidities and clinicians’ low threshold of suspicion for this infection. 5. A more accurate assessment of the risk, and more accurate guidance, would therefore result from – (i) An immediate review by Public Health England of all data held to date with a re-calculation of the incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection and consequential risk being reflected in updated guidance and web-site information, and (ii) Consideration being given by all the bodies to whom this Report is sent of whether there is a better investigative basis which could be used for obtaining relevant data and statistics as to the true incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whether by means of a research study or otherwise. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notification.

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 keep national Mycobacterium Chimaera risk guidance and web information updated

Wider context from the report

“1. It is apparent that it is important that the nationally recognised level of the risk of developing Mycobacterium Chimaera from exposure to a heater cooler unit is accurate, in that it accurately reflects the most current statistical data, and is based on the best gathering of statistical data as to the true incidence of such infection as can practically be achieved. This is because the nationally recognised level of risk is the proper basis upon which – (i) The informed consent of a patient for a relevant surgery is obtained, and (ii) Post-operatively, the patient and the clinician(s) caring for him (including his General Practitioner) will base their “threshold for suspicion” for Mycobacterium Chimaera if the patient develops an infection which cannot quickly be identified and treated. 2. Public Health England, together with the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery, and the College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists, are the national bodies which are able to co-ordinate collation of relevant statistical evidence and then formulate and disseminate accurate information about the level of risk. It is inappropriate for individual hospitals, cardiac centres, or Trusts to formulate risk level on the basis of their own data as this would result, nationally, in the dissemination of inconsistent information. 3. Public Health England’s “Clinical guidance for secondary care” and “Information for general practice” are based on January 2017 data. Further, on its website, under the heading “Who could be at risk of Mycobacterium chimaera infection”, Public Health England currently states, “People most at risk are those who’ve had heart valve surgery since January 2013. About 1 person in every 5,000 who has this type of surgery will develop the infection.” This assessment is also based on data collated to January 2017. 4. The evidence at the inquest showed that the figure of “1 person in every 5,000” is inaccurate, in that : (i) It is based on data from 2017 and not updated data, and (ii) It is based on data which reflects only those patients who are reported to Public Health England as having died of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whereas the true incidence of the infection is very likely to be higher; the likelihood is that there is a potentially significant number of deaths from undiagnosed Mycobacterium Chimaera, given the patient cohort’s usual level of co-morbidities and clinicians’ low threshold of suspicion for this infection. 5. A more accurate assessment of the risk, and more accurate guidance, would therefore result from – (i) An immediate review by Public Health England of all data held to date with a re-calculation of the incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection and consequential risk being reflected in updated guidance and web-site information, and (ii) Consideration being given by all the bodies to whom this Report is sent of whether there is a better investigative basis which could be used for obtaining relevant data and statistics as to the true incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whether by means of a research study or otherwise. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notification; Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance.

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 capture the true incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection

Wider context from the report

“1. It is apparent that it is important that the nationally recognised level of the risk of developing Mycobacterium Chimaera from exposure to a heater cooler unit is accurate, in that it accurately reflects the most current statistical data, and is based on the best gathering of statistical data as to the true incidence of such infection as can practically be achieved. This is because the nationally recognised level of risk is the proper basis upon which – (i) The informed consent of a patient for a relevant surgery is obtained, and (ii) Post-operatively, the patient and the clinician(s) caring for him (including his General Practitioner) will base their “threshold for suspicion” for Mycobacterium Chimaera if the patient develops an infection which cannot quickly be identified and treated. 2. Public Health England, together with the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery, and the College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists, are the national bodies which are able to co-ordinate collation of relevant statistical evidence and then formulate and disseminate accurate information about the level of risk. It is inappropriate for individual hospitals, cardiac centres, or Trusts to formulate risk level on the basis of their own data as this would result, nationally, in the dissemination of inconsistent information. 3. Public Health England’s “Clinical guidance for secondary care” and “Information for general practice” are based on January 2017 data. Further, on its website, under the heading “Who could be at risk of Mycobacterium chimaera infection”, Public Health England currently states, “People most at risk are those who’ve had heart valve surgery since January 2013. About 1 person in every 5,000 who has this type of surgery will develop the infection.” This assessment is also based on data collated to January 2017. 4. The evidence at the inquest showed that the figure of “1 person in every 5,000” is inaccurate, in that : (i) It is based on data from 2017 and not updated data, and (ii) It is based on data which reflects only those patients who are reported to Public Health England as having died of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whereas the true incidence of the infection is very likely to be higher; the likelihood is that there is a potentially significant number of deaths from undiagnosed Mycobacterium Chimaera, given the patient cohort’s usual level of co-morbidities and clinicians’ low threshold of suspicion for this infection. 5. A more accurate assessment of the risk, and more accurate guidance, would therefore result from – (i) An immediate review by Public Health England of all data held to date with a re-calculation of the incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection and consequential risk being reflected in updated guidance and web-site information, and (ii) Consideration being given by all the bodies to whom this Report is sent of whether there is a better investigative basis which could be used for obtaining relevant data and statistics as to the true incidence of Mycobacterium Chimaera infection, whether by means of a research study or otherwise. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable Mycobacterium Chimaera infection-risk information and notification.

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

Complete and submit an updated M. chimaera infection risk assessment for publication.

Verbatim wording from the response

“updated risk assessment was undertaken by PHE in November 2019 and submitted to an international medical conference with a view to publication of an article in a medical journal. An extract from the conference abstract book is attached at Exhibit PHE1¹. The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the cancellation of the conference and delayed completion of the publication.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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

Further update the risk estimates and publish them by September 2021.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9) PHE will further update the risk estimates and ensure that these are published by September 2021. The respondent bodies will thereafter cascade these updated risk estimates to healthcare professionals involved in informing and consenting patients or investigating and diagnosing these infections, namely consultant microbiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons. This will be achieved through our respective clinical networks.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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 updated risk estimates through clinical networks to professionals informing or consenting patients and investigating or diagnosing infections.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9) PHE will further update the risk estimates and ensure that these are published by September 2021. The respondent bodies will thereafter cascade these updated risk estimates to healthcare professionals involved in informing and consenting patients or investigating and diagnosing these infections, namely consultant microbiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons. This will be achieved through our respective clinical networks.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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

Forward requests to NHS England to agree responsibility and a timetable for updating healthcare guidance and NHS website information.

Verbatim wording from the response

“12) Given the transfer of responsibility for management for the incident, we will forward this request for the further updating of guidance and to the need to update the NHS website to NHS England to agree responsibilities and a timetable for updating.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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

Maintain surveillance capturing all potential M. chimaera cases and publish information on newly diagnosed cases and associated deaths.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4) In responding to the potential threat posed by transmission of M. chimaera from contaminated heater cooler units (“HCUs”) used in open-heart surgery, PHE established a surveillance system to capture data on all cases (not just cases resulting in death) potentially arising as a result of open-heart surgery performed in the UK. PHE continues to collate and publish information on newly diagnosed cases and associated deaths. This can be found on:”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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

NHS England is responsible for updating guidance and the NHS website, so the requests will be forwarded to it.

Verbatim wording from the response

“10) In relation to the updating of the guidance for healthcare providers, we would like to make the Coroner aware that NHS England assumed responsibility for management of the M. chimaera incident in October 2016. PHE and SCTS worked with NHS England to support the patient notification exercise launched in February 2017, including the development of guidance for healthcare providers.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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 risk estimate was not inaccurate because it measured infection risk using data on all reported cases, not only deaths.

Verbatim wording from the response

“3) With regard to the concern in paragraph (1)(ii) above, we would like to clarify to the Coroner that these risk calculations were not based solely on risk of death but in fact based on risk of infection associated with this type of surgery, namely heart-valve surgery performed on bypass. As such, data collection was not restricted to patients reported to PHE as having died of Mycobacterium chimaera (M. chimaera) infection.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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 surveillance provides a reasonable basis for ongoing risk monitoring, so a revised or alternative investigative method is unnecessary.

Verbatim wording from the response

“7) With reference to paragraph (2)(ii) above and given that the current methodology includes surveillance data not just restricted to deaths, the respondent bodies believe the established mechanism provides a reasonable means for ongoing monitoring of risk and that a revised or alternative investigative basis is not required.”

Source location

2021-0204-Response-from-Public-Health-England-Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 28 June 2021

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
4/4

Data last updated 7 September 2026