PFD report

Marie Hilda Millward Winter · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 15 Jan 2019•Manchester City

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

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 raised2

  1. Administration of anticoagulation medication following a head injury
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe anticoagulant managementPart of recurring concern: Unsafe medication administration
  2. Failure to restrict anticoagulation medication advice or administration involving ambulance technicians
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe medication administration
Responses linked to these concerns

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

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    Advising on Apixaban and other medications beyond six authorised medications falls outside an EMT’s scope of practice.

    Stated by North West Ambulance Service NHS TrustOutside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

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

Administration of anticoagulation medication following a head injury

Wider context from the report

“The evidence was that the medication (Apixaban) was given to Mrs Millward Winter at Each Step Nursing Home on the advice of and/or in the presence of the Ambulance Technicians from North West Ambulance Service after she had sustained a head injury and prior to transporting her to hospital. The concern is that the administration of this anticoagulation medication on the morning of the 19th August 2017, following a head injury, worsened an internal bleed and contributed to Mrs Millward Winter’s death. It is of concern that such medication has been given when the patient has suffered a head injury (and is at risk of an internal bleed). It is of concern that the medication has been given on the advice of and/or in the presence of the ambulance technicians. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe anticoagulant management; Unsafe medication administration.

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 restrict anticoagulation medication advice or administration involving ambulance technicians

Wider context from the report

“The evidence was that the medication (Apixaban) was given to Mrs Millward Winter at Each Step Nursing Home on the advice of and/or in the presence of the Ambulance Technicians from North West Ambulance Service after she had sustained a head injury and prior to transporting her to hospital. The concern is that the administration of this anticoagulation medication on the morning of the 19th August 2017, following a head injury, worsened an internal bleed and contributed to Mrs Millward Winter’s death. It is of concern that such medication has been given when the patient has suffered a head injury (and is at risk of an internal bleed). It is of concern that the medication has been given on the advice of and/or in the presence of the ambulance technicians. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe medication administration.

Open source report

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

Advising on Apixaban and other medications beyond six authorised medications falls outside an EMT’s scope of practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“████████ recollection is that there was no discussion in relation to the administration of anti-coagulant medication for two reasons; firstly, Mrs Millward-Winter was being conveyed to the hospital because she had suffered a head injury and was taking blood thinning medication and secondly, advising on the administration of an anti-coagulant was outside of his scope of practice as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT).”

Source location

2019-0020-Response-by-North-West-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 23 May 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

The nursing-home nurse, rather than an EMT, was responsible for deciding which medication should be administered and when.

Verbatim wording from the response

“An Advanced Paramedic has provided an overview in light of the Regulation 28 Report and has noted that Mrs Millward-Winter was resident in a nursing home. In their view, the nurse on duty at the unit would supersede an EMT in respect of which medication should be administered and at what point.”

Source location

2019-0020-Response-by-North-West-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 23 May 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 positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    The Regulation 28 report was issued prematurely because the Trust was not given an opportunity to provide additional evidence or clarification.

    Stated by North West Ambulance Service NHS TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 Regulation 28 report was issued prematurely because the Trust was not given an opportunity to provide additional evidence or clarification.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In relation to the Regulation 28 Report, I wish to draw to your attention to the fact that the Trust was not notified of the inquest date, NWAS statements were read in to evidence and the Trust was not granted Interested Person status and as such was not legally represented at the hearing or in receipt of coronerial disclosure.”

Source location

2019-0020-Response-by-North-West-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 23 May 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