PFD report

Matthew James Rogers · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 20 Dec 2019•Blackpool and the Fylde

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
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 monitor observations hourly for patients with a NEWS score greater than 5
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical Early Warning Score systems for deterioration
  2. Insufficient nurse staffing for the night shift
    Part of recurring concern: Insufficient safe staffing and senior cover out of hours
  3. Lack of processes to address omissions of care arising from understaffing
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to establish effective plans to address identified safety concerns
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 monitor observations hourly for patients with a NEWS score greater than 5

Wider context from the report

“The Serious Incident Investigation Report set out that the patient's observations were not monitored on an hourly basis in accordance with the Royal College of Physician's guidance for frequency of observations for a patient with a NEWS score of greater than 5. It was noted in the report that Mr Rogers did not have a set of observations recorded for two and a half hours from 03:30 to 06:00. Whilst it was not clear why this omission in care occurred, it was felt likely that this occurred because of understaffing of nurses compounded by the large number of patients within the department. It was reported to me that the nurse staff levels were below template for the night shift. The staffing establishment was for 10 Registered Nurses. At the time in question six substantive Registered Nurses were on duty, plus one agency Emergency Department Registered Nurse. There were no Twilight Nurses or Long Day Registered Nurses. The Serious Incident Investigation Report did not address how these problems were proposed to be resolved by the Trust and what processes were being put in place to address the issue of omission of care arising from understaffing. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical Early Warning Score systems for deterioration.

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 nurse staffing for the night shift

Wider context from the report

“The Serious Incident Investigation Report set out that the patient's observations were not monitored on an hourly basis in accordance with the Royal College of Physician's guidance for frequency of observations for a patient with a NEWS score of greater than 5. It was noted in the report that Mr Rogers did not have a set of observations recorded for two and a half hours from 03:30 to 06:00. Whilst it was not clear why this omission in care occurred, it was felt likely that this occurred because of understaffing of nurses compounded by the large number of patients within the department. It was reported to me that the nurse staff levels were below template for the night shift. The staffing establishment was for 10 Registered Nurses. At the time in question six substantive Registered Nurses were on duty, plus one agency Emergency Department Registered Nurse. There were no Twilight Nurses or Long Day Registered Nurses. The Serious Incident Investigation Report did not address how these problems were proposed to be resolved by the Trust and what processes were being put in place to address the issue of omission of care arising from understaffing. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Insufficient safe staffing and senior cover out of hours.

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 processes to address omissions of care arising from understaffing

Wider context from the report

“The Serious Incident Investigation Report set out that the patient's observations were not monitored on an hourly basis in accordance with the Royal College of Physician's guidance for frequency of observations for a patient with a NEWS score of greater than 5. It was noted in the report that Mr Rogers did not have a set of observations recorded for two and a half hours from 03:30 to 06:00. Whilst it was not clear why this omission in care occurred, it was felt likely that this occurred because of understaffing of nurses compounded by the large number of patients within the department. It was reported to me that the nurse staff levels were below template for the night shift. The staffing establishment was for 10 Registered Nurses. At the time in question six substantive Registered Nurses were on duty, plus one agency Emergency Department Registered Nurse. There were no Twilight Nurses or Long Day Registered Nurses. The Serious Incident Investigation Report did not address how these problems were proposed to be resolved by the Trust and what processes were being put in place to address the issue of omission of care arising from understaffing. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to establish effective plans to address identified safety concerns.

Open source report
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
0/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.