PFD report

Riya HIRANI · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 15 Sep 2023•Inner North 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
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
6

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 raised4

  1. Failure to provide appropriate treatment and hospital admission for a seriously ill child
  2. Failure to escalate care in response to clearly expressed parental concerns about a deteriorating child
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to acknowledge and act on family and carer safety concerns in patient carePart of recurring concern: Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical deterioration
  3. Failure to recognise the severity of a seriously ill child’s condition
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical deterioration
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

    Add paediatric cases and learning from pertinent clinical presentations as a standard agenda item for the monthly Deteriorating Patients Group.

    Stated by London North West University Healthcare NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 22 September 2023.
  2. Action

    Operate point-of-care testing for Streptococcus A and respiratory illness within the emergency pathway.

    Stated by London North West University Healthcare NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 22 September 2023.
  3. Action

    Develop, ratify, disseminate and audit a paediatric examination SOP covering escalation, SBAR handovers, senior opinions and mandatory face-to-face review before discharge.

    Stated by London North West University Healthcare NHS TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 22 September 2023.

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 provide appropriate treatment and hospital admission for a seriously ill child

Wider context from the report

“Riya’s mother took her to hospital a full day before Riya’s fatal collapse, because she believed that Riya was very sick. Unfortunately, the junior doctor who examined and assessed Riya failed to appreciate the severity of her condition. Instead of giving her intravenous antibiotics and admitting her to hospital, he diagnosed a virus and discharged her with advice to take over the counter painkillers and a sheet describing the management of sore throats. I intend to make a PFD report to the medical director of Northwick Park Hospital about the diagnosis and treatment of Riya’s condition. However, I am writing to you both because it seems to me that there is a fundamental issue regarding the lack of appropriate diagnosis and treatment that is apparent locally but relevant nationally. When Riya’s mother took her to hospital, she did so because it seemed to her that this illness was qualitatively very different from any other that Riya had suffered in her nine years. In short, Riya’s mum was convinced that Riya was extremely ill, she articulated clearly and at every stage in hospital why she thought that Riya was extremely ill, and she even questioned the doctor about whether this could be a group A streptococcal infection. (There was a well publicised outbreak at the time and the hospital had actually received an alert about this.) I heard at inquest that, even in the middle of the night, there was a consultant available to give a second opinion if this had been requested by medical personnel. However, no thought was given to seeking a second opinion. I think it highly likely that if it had been open to Riya’s family to seek a second opinion at that point, they would have done so without hesitation. One of the reasons that coroners are local to an area is because this makes them better placed to recognise any local trends. Although the events bringing the two children to hospital were very different, as I listened to the evidence at Riya’s inquest I noticed some striking similarities between the circumstances of Riya’s treatment and those of Martha Mills. On each occasion a parent’s articulately expressed and ultimately prescient concerns about a previously healthy but rapidly deteriorating child, did not result in appropriate escalation of care. I heard the inquest touching Martha’s death last year. I am aware from press reports of the attempts of Martha’s mother to enable families in such a situation to have ready access to a second medical opinion. It seems to me that you should be aware of the circumstances of Riya’s death before you decide how to proceed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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 escalate care in response to clearly expressed parental concerns about a deteriorating child

Wider context from the report

“Riya’s mother took her to hospital a full day before Riya’s fatal collapse, because she believed that Riya was very sick. Unfortunately, the junior doctor who examined and assessed Riya failed to appreciate the severity of her condition. Instead of giving her intravenous antibiotics and admitting her to hospital, he diagnosed a virus and discharged her with advice to take over the counter painkillers and a sheet describing the management of sore throats. I intend to make a PFD report to the medical director of Northwick Park Hospital about the diagnosis and treatment of Riya’s condition. However, I am writing to you both because it seems to me that there is a fundamental issue regarding the lack of appropriate diagnosis and treatment that is apparent locally but relevant nationally. When Riya’s mother took her to hospital, she did so because it seemed to her that this illness was qualitatively very different from any other that Riya had suffered in her nine years. In short, Riya’s mum was convinced that Riya was extremely ill, she articulated clearly and at every stage in hospital why she thought that Riya was extremely ill, and she even questioned the doctor about whether this could be a group A streptococcal infection. (There was a well publicised outbreak at the time and the hospital had actually received an alert about this.) I heard at inquest that, even in the middle of the night, there was a consultant available to give a second opinion if this had been requested by medical personnel. However, no thought was given to seeking a second opinion. I think it highly likely that if it had been open to Riya’s family to seek a second opinion at that point, they would have done so without hesitation. One of the reasons that coroners are local to an area is because this makes them better placed to recognise any local trends. Although the events bringing the two children to hospital were very different, as I listened to the evidence at Riya’s inquest I noticed some striking similarities between the circumstances of Riya’s treatment and those of Martha Mills. On each occasion a parent’s articulately expressed and ultimately prescient concerns about a previously healthy but rapidly deteriorating child, did not result in appropriate escalation of care. I heard the inquest touching Martha’s death last year. I am aware from press reports of the attempts of Martha’s mother to enable families in such a situation to have ready access to a second medical opinion. It seems to me that you should be aware of the circumstances of Riya’s death before you decide how to proceed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to acknowledge and act on family and carer safety concerns in patient care; Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical 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

Failure to recognise the severity of a seriously ill child’s condition

Wider context from the report

“Riya’s mother took her to hospital a full day before Riya’s fatal collapse, because she believed that Riya was very sick. Unfortunately, the junior doctor who examined and assessed Riya failed to appreciate the severity of her condition. Instead of giving her intravenous antibiotics and admitting her to hospital, he diagnosed a virus and discharged her with advice to take over the counter painkillers and a sheet describing the management of sore throats. I intend to make a PFD report to the medical director of Northwick Park Hospital about the diagnosis and treatment of Riya’s condition. However, I am writing to you both because it seems to me that there is a fundamental issue regarding the lack of appropriate diagnosis and treatment that is apparent locally but relevant nationally. When Riya’s mother took her to hospital, she did so because it seemed to her that this illness was qualitatively very different from any other that Riya had suffered in her nine years. In short, Riya’s mum was convinced that Riya was extremely ill, she articulated clearly and at every stage in hospital why she thought that Riya was extremely ill, and she even questioned the doctor about whether this could be a group A streptococcal infection. (There was a well publicised outbreak at the time and the hospital had actually received an alert about this.) I heard at inquest that, even in the middle of the night, there was a consultant available to give a second opinion if this had been requested by medical personnel. However, no thought was given to seeking a second opinion. I think it highly likely that if it had been open to Riya’s family to seek a second opinion at that point, they would have done so without hesitation. One of the reasons that coroners are local to an area is because this makes them better placed to recognise any local trends. Although the events bringing the two children to hospital were very different, as I listened to the evidence at Riya’s inquest I noticed some striking similarities between the circumstances of Riya’s treatment and those of Martha Mills. On each occasion a parent’s articulately expressed and ultimately prescient concerns about a previously healthy but rapidly deteriorating child, did not result in appropriate escalation of care. I heard the inquest touching Martha’s death last year. I am aware from press reports of the attempts of Martha’s mother to enable families in such a situation to have ready access to a second medical opinion. It seems to me that you should be aware of the circumstances of Riya’s death before you decide how to proceed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical 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

Failure to seek or provide ready access to a second medical opinion when serious illness is disputed

Wider context from the report

“Riya’s mother took her to hospital a full day before Riya’s fatal collapse, because she believed that Riya was very sick. Unfortunately, the junior doctor who examined and assessed Riya failed to appreciate the severity of her condition. Instead of giving her intravenous antibiotics and admitting her to hospital, he diagnosed a virus and discharged her with advice to take over the counter painkillers and a sheet describing the management of sore throats. I intend to make a PFD report to the medical director of Northwick Park Hospital about the diagnosis and treatment of Riya’s condition. However, I am writing to you both because it seems to me that there is a fundamental issue regarding the lack of appropriate diagnosis and treatment that is apparent locally but relevant nationally. When Riya’s mother took her to hospital, she did so because it seemed to her that this illness was qualitatively very different from any other that Riya had suffered in her nine years. In short, Riya’s mum was convinced that Riya was extremely ill, she articulated clearly and at every stage in hospital why she thought that Riya was extremely ill, and she even questioned the doctor about whether this could be a group A streptococcal infection. (There was a well publicised outbreak at the time and the hospital had actually received an alert about this.) I heard at inquest that, even in the middle of the night, there was a consultant available to give a second opinion if this had been requested by medical personnel. However, no thought was given to seeking a second opinion. I think it highly likely that if it had been open to Riya’s family to seek a second opinion at that point, they would have done so without hesitation. One of the reasons that coroners are local to an area is because this makes them better placed to recognise any local trends. Although the events bringing the two children to hospital were very different, as I listened to the evidence at Riya’s inquest I noticed some striking similarities between the circumstances of Riya’s treatment and those of Martha Mills. On each occasion a parent’s articulately expressed and ultimately prescient concerns about a previously healthy but rapidly deteriorating child, did not result in appropriate escalation of care. I heard the inquest touching Martha’s death last year. I am aware from press reports of the attempts of Martha’s mother to enable families in such a situation to have ready access to a second medical opinion. It seems to me that you should be aware of the circumstances of Riya’s death before you decide how to proceed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical second-opinion processes.

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

Add paediatric cases and learning from pertinent clinical presentations as a standard agenda item for the monthly Deteriorating Patients Group.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Additionally, the Trust holds a monthly Deteriorating Patients Group. This is chaired by the Trust Medical Director and is an organisational Trust platform to discuss deteriorating patients, where cases are reviewed, and learning is embedded into future practices. This meeting is attended by Director level clinical staff from all clinical specialties and subgroups to ensure collaborative and robust oversight. This meeting is formally minuted, develops actions with named lead professionals and influences Trust policies and procedures. As a direct-action Paediatrics and the learning from any pertinent clinical presentations have been added as a standard agenda item.”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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

Operate point-of-care testing for Streptococcus A and respiratory illness within the emergency pathway.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Point of care testing”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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

Develop, ratify, disseminate and audit a paediatric examination SOP covering escalation, SBAR handovers, senior opinions and mandatory face-to-face review before discharge.

Verbatim wording from the response

“New standard operating procedure”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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

Implement the nationally approved Paediatric Early Warning System observation and escalation charts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Nationally approved Paediatric Early Warning System”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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

Advise clinicians to seek senior review when caregivers remain concerned after clinical review.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As an interim measure pending completion of the SOP all clinicians have been advised through multi professional meetings and via email communication that if a caregiver raises concerns following clinical review the clinician should have a low threshold for seeking senior review.”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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

    Audit the effectiveness of communication about clinical guidelines and national alerts.

    Stated by London North West University Healthcare NHS TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 22 September 2023.

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

Audit the effectiveness of communication about clinical guidelines and national alerts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Clinical guidelines and National alerts are shared with staff through our governance, clinical and staff meetings and additionally electronically via email, and the Trust would like to reiterate that an audit of effective communication around clinical guidelines and national alerts will be undertaken.”

Source location

Response from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 22 September 2023

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
1/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026