PFD report

Linda Yvonne Fisher · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 9 May 2014•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
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
1

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 accurately determine patient weight for medication dosage
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to individualise medication doses to patient-specific factors
  2. Failure to communicate relevant family medical history effectively to hospital staff involved in care
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable communication of patient-care information between clinical staff
  3. Failure to obtain relevant family medical history from patients
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete clinical history-taking
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.1

  1. Action

    Perform Mid Upper Arm Circumference calculations using MUST when patients cannot be weighed, to assist in establishing accurate weight.

    Stated by Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 9 May 2014.

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

  1. Position

    Familial history was obtained, and its absence at admission did not materially affect disease-risk assessment or treatment.

    Stated by Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 accurately determine patient weight for medication dosage

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard evidence that patients may be admitted to hospital who, once medically assessed, may require medication the dosage of which may be determined by the weight of that patient. On occasion such a patient may not be able to be weighed in order to determine their weight, perhaps for example due to a leg injury that prevents the patient bearing their own weight for long enough to allow medical staff to weigh them. In such circumstances, a Doctor placed reliance upon the Deceased’s own verbal assessment of her own weight and used this information to decide upon the medication dosage. Although I was informed that the Trust is aware of this issue and have considered one method of resolving it [which I understand is not to be implemented], I remain concerned that patients may be prescribed medications at a dosage which is inaccurately determined due to the fact that a patient has incorrectly assessed their own weight, and if patients do not receive the correct dosage future deaths may result. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to individualise medication doses to patient-specific factors.

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 communicate relevant family medical history effectively to hospital staff involved in care

Wider context from the report

“2. The inquest also heard evidence that other members of the Deceased’s family had suffered from a similar condition. There were no records to suggest that this relevant information had been obtained by medical staff following her admission, and therefore nor had it been communicated effectively to other staff who may in due course have had involvement in her care. I am concerned that if such information is not obtained appropriately from patients and is not communicated effectively to other hospital staff then decisions pertaining to clinical care may be made erroneously and future deaths may result. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable communication of patient-care information between clinical staff.

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 obtain relevant family medical history from patients

Wider context from the report

“2. The inquest also heard evidence that other members of the Deceased’s family had suffered from a similar condition. There were no records to suggest that this relevant information had been obtained by medical staff following her admission, and therefore nor had it been communicated effectively to other staff who may in due course have had involvement in her care. I am concerned that if such information is not obtained appropriately from patients and is not communicated effectively to other hospital staff then decisions pertaining to clinical care may be made erroneously and future deaths may result. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete clinical history-taking.

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

Perform Mid Upper Arm Circumference calculations using MUST when patients cannot be weighed, to assist in establishing accurate weight.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As you were advised at the inquest the Ward staff, now, in addition to obtaining verbal confirmation of a patients weight, if it is not possible to weigh the patient, a Mid Upper Arm Circumference calculation is performed (MUAC) in line with the malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to assist in establishing an accurate weight.”

Source location

2014-0226-Response-by-Blackpool-Teaching-Hospitals
Page 1 · response
Published 9 May 2014

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

Familial history was obtained, and its absence at admission did not materially affect disease-risk assessment or treatment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2) That a familial history of disease was not recorded in the notes.”

Source location

2014-0226-Response-by-Blackpool-Teaching-Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 9 May 2014

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

Exact patient weight is not required for dalteparin dosage; verbal weight assessment is acceptable when physical weighing is not possible.

Verbatim wording from the response

“1) That we may rely upon patient’s verbal assessment of their own weight to determine medication dosage.”

Source location

2014-0226-Response-by-Blackpool-Teaching-Hospitals
Page 1 · response
Published 9 May 2014

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 Trust's existing VTE risk assessment tool is adequate for assessing patients and determining dalteparin treatment.

    Stated by Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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 Trust's existing VTE risk assessment tool is adequate for assessing patients and determining dalteparin treatment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) assessment tools utilised at the Trust, and indeed nationally as a result of NICE, cover medical and surgical patients alike with slightly different criteria.”

Source location

2014-0226-Response-by-Blackpool-Teaching-Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 9 May 2014

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