PFD report

David Gifford · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Jul 2025•Avon

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
2

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. Failure of JRCALC guidelines to provide guidance on atypical vascular emergency presentations
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate recognition controls for atypical aortic emergencies
  2. Lack of ambulance training and knowledge on subtle signs of vascular emergencies
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate recognition controls for atypical aortic emergencies
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

    Review abdominal pain and vascular emergency guidelines, considering terminology on atypical aortic presentations, the aortic dissection risk score and endoleaks after repair.

    Stated by Association of Ambulance Chief ExecutivesStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 July 2025.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Training and education of ambulance staff are outside the respondent’s responsibility.

    Stated by Association of Ambulance Chief ExecutivesOutside 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

Failure of JRCALC guidelines to provide guidance on atypical vascular emergency presentations

Wider context from the report

“(1) Training and knowledge focuses on the classic signs and symptoms associated with an AAA. However, there are a group of patients who will not present in this way, and who may be challenging to diagnose. Whilst there may be many medical conditions that could be similar, there does not seem to be much focus given to the identification of vascular emergencies within training and knowledge updates. Therefore when paramedics attend emergencies, in the absence of classic symptoms, they may be wrongly reassured. Where a person has an extensive aortic history, the importance of aortic pathology should be considered. (2) There has not been training or medical education for ambulance on vascular emergencies for a long time. The evidence was that JRCALC guidelines did recently highlight the number of patients that may not present with the traditional ‘red flags’ but did not provide further guidance. This is a national issue where ambulance staff should be knowledgeable about the more subtle signs of vascular emergencies that may be missed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate recognition controls for atypical aortic emergencies.

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 ambulance training and knowledge on subtle signs of vascular emergencies

Wider context from the report

“(1) Training and knowledge focuses on the classic signs and symptoms associated with an AAA. However, there are a group of patients who will not present in this way, and who may be challenging to diagnose. Whilst there may be many medical conditions that could be similar, there does not seem to be much focus given to the identification of vascular emergencies within training and knowledge updates. Therefore when paramedics attend emergencies, in the absence of classic symptoms, they may be wrongly reassured. Where a person has an extensive aortic history, the importance of aortic pathology should be considered. (2) There has not been training or medical education for ambulance on vascular emergencies for a long time. The evidence was that JRCALC guidelines did recently highlight the number of patients that may not present with the traditional ‘red flags’ but did not provide further guidance. This is a national issue where ambulance staff should be knowledgeable about the more subtle signs of vascular emergencies that may be missed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate recognition controls for atypical aortic emergencies.

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 abdominal pain and vascular emergency guidelines, considering terminology on atypical aortic presentations, the aortic dissection risk score and endoleaks after repair.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We discussed your matters of concerns at our JRCALC meeting on the 22 July 2025. JRCALC consists of expert medical advisors including those with vascular and surgical knowledge. The committee made the decision to undertake a review of the existing abdominal pain and vascular emergencies guidelines. We will look to include additional terminology for clinicians to ensure that they take account of the potential for patients with extensive aortic history not to present with traditional red flag symptoms and to carefully consider whether they should be transported to hospital. We will also advocate the use of the Aortic Dissection Detection risk score during their clinical assessment to aid decision-making around conveyance. Finally, we will also include reference to the potential for ‘Endoleaks’ following an aortic repair.”

Source location

Response from Association of Ambulance Chief Executives
Page 2 · response
Published 15 July 2025

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

Training and education of ambulance staff are outside the respondent’s responsibility.

Verbatim wording from the response

“AACE are not responsible for the training or education of ambulance staff, however we plan to share and discuss this preventing future death report with ambulance service medical directors (NASMeD) at our next national meeting. We will”

Source location

Response from Association of Ambulance Chief Executives
Page 1 · response
Published 15 July 2025

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-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. 1

    Share and discuss the preventing future deaths report with ambulance medical directors and education leads through national networks.

    Stated by Association of Ambulance Chief ExecutivesStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 July 2025.

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

Share and discuss the preventing future deaths report with ambulance medical directors and education leads through national networks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“AACE are not responsible for the training or education of ambulance staff, however we plan to share and discuss this preventing future death report with ambulance service medical directors (NASMeD) at our next national meeting. We will”

Source location

Response from Association of Ambulance Chief Executives
Page 1 · response
Published 15 July 2025

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