PFD report

Mr Barry Clive Loxston · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 12 Nov 2025•Inner West 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
6

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
15

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 raised6

  1. Failure to supervise patients taking medication
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe medication administration
  2. Poor patient handling and failure to prevent patients lying in their own excrement
  3. Lack of a system for direct contact between the transplant team and local on-call nephrology team to exchange clinically relevant patient information
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to communicate clinically important information reliably between care services
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.10

  1. Action

    Continue medication-safety audits incorporating patient feedback and report findings to ward teams.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  2. Action

    Record fitness to remain active on the transplant list in every nephrology clinic letter.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  3. Action

    Include hypoalbuminaemia in peri-operative transplant assessment and suspend affected patients until investigations and stability support reactivation.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 November 2025.

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

  1. Position

    Relevant blood tests were reviewed, and hypoalbuminaemia was not considered an absolute contraindication to transplantation under applicable guidelines.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupDisputes 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 supervise patients taking medication

Wider context from the report

“2. That leaving medication with patients for them to take in their own time rather than supervise the taking of medication by the patient causes drug maladministration issues that may cause or contribute to deaths of patents. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — 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

Poor patient handling and failure to prevent patients lying in their own excrement

Wider context from the report

“1. That poor patient handling and allowing patients to lie for hours in their own excrement is detrimental to patient wellbeing and may contribute to deaths. ”

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

Lack of a system for direct contact between the transplant team and local on-call nephrology team to exchange clinically relevant patient information

Wider context from the report

“6. That there is no system recommending direct contact with the local on call nephrology team by the transplant team to check whether there are clinically relevant matters in relation to the patient and their suitability for transplant that the local team are aware of and the transplant team are not, such as active other chronic illness or abnormal test results. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to communicate clinically important information reliably between care services.

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 review relevant blood tests before surgery and incorporate them into surgical risk assessment and consent

Wider context from the report

“4. That all relevant blood tests, including albumin level since low albumin may be associated with significant post operative complication risk, are not reviewed prior to surgery and considered as part of the risk/benefit analysis of surgery and the consenting process. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate preoperative assessment of surgical suitability and risk.

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 investigation of medication maladministration concerns

Wider context from the report

“3. That lack of investigation of the matter outlined in 2 increases the risk to patients of the concern outlined in 2. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably learn from medication incidents and implement safeguards; Unreliable safeguarding response to medication maladministration.

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 a system mandating review of suitability to remain on the transplant list at each nephrology review

Wider context from the report

“5. That there is no system mandating suitability to remain on the transplant list by the local nephrologist at each nephrology review. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Continue medication-safety audits incorporating patient feedback and report findings to ward teams.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Reviewing the corresponding audit in 2025, improvement can be seen, with scores ranging between 91%-100%. As part of the auditing process, the auditor now speaks to patients regarding patient experience and care within the ward and feeds this back to the ward team to understand and improve patient experience of medications. This process will be continued within the Directorate to ensure we remain focused on medication safety.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Record fitness to remain active on the transplant list in every nephrology clinic letter.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We conducted a retrospective audit at St George’s from May 2023 to June 2024. We reviewed 31 patients who were active on the transplant waiting list. We found that 85% (89/105) of patients had a nephrologist review their suitability during their regular 3-monthly review. A similar audit was carried out at St Helier, where a retrospective audit confirmed that for patients active on the transplant list, 96% (186/193) had been reviewed by a nephrologist within the last 4 months. These audits have shown that there is room for improvement. We have shared the outcomes of these audits with all three centres. Our aim is to achieve 100% of patients to be reviewed for their suitability for transplant at nephrology clinics and we will continue to regularly audit and monitor this.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 4 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Include hypoalbuminaemia in peri-operative transplant assessment and suspend affected patients until investigations and stability support reactivation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“According to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] and European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) Guidelines, hypoalbuminemia is not an absolute contraindication for acute transplantation. However, since hypoalbuminemia is known to affect outcomes from surgery generally, we will be including it in our peri-operative assessment in future to contribute to risk and benefit analysis of transplantation. Where there is an unknown cause of hypoalbuminemia or chronically low albumin with known cause, these patients will be suspended on national waiting lists and will only be reactivated once all investigations are complete and patients are stable to be reactivated. These patients will be monitored by the patient’s nephrologist and, in cases with multiple comorbidities, will pass through the transplant MDT before activation on the national waiting list.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Review acute and historic investigations and incorporate results into transplant risk-benefit analysis and consent.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to the above measures which will address the pre-transplant activation process, since this incident there has been a change in unit practice to review both acute and historic investigations and to better consider general fitness for surgery, including discussion with the base hospital nephrologist. The results of all requested tests are considered in the risk/benefit analysis of surgery and in the consenting process. Since the average waiting time for transplant is 3.5 years, and once an offer is deemed not suitable for transplant irrespective of recipient and donor issues, there is no guarantee when the next offer will come, it is important that risk assessments are timely and balanced.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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 a revised transplant-offer pathway requiring base-hospital nephrology contact, recent blood-test review, communication checkpoints, and regular audit.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Matter 6: There is a revised pathway that outlines the actions required when a kidney offer is received for transplant. This states that contact should be made with various teams, including the nephrologist at the base hospital. We have added multiple points along the pathway to ensure that communications are made appropriately and built in regular audit to provide assurance of the effectiveness of these processes (see appendix).”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 5 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Share electronic patient-record access between St George’s, Epsom, and St Helier to support transplant information transfer.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition, now that the same electronic patient record system at St George’s has been adopted at Epsom and St Helier, access to patient records will be shared across the sites. This cannot be rolled out for Brighton, however the revised pathway acts to ensure robust handover of information.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 5 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Hold fixed monthly multidisciplinary reviews of waiting-list patients and record outcomes to support activation or suspension decisions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“All three units have an existing structure to review their cohort of waitlisted patients on monthly basis and ensure that clinical reviews are up to date. At St George’s it happens on a fixed day of the month. At St Helier and Brighton these meetings are sporadic. The learning from this incident has helped streamline these to have a fixed day of every month to review all patients in an MDT. The outcome of this is recorded in a templated document. The transplant coordinators make sure that patients are appropriately activated or suspended after these MDT meetings.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 4 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Deliver medication-safety training and require induction competency assessments before staff administer medicines.

Verbatim wording from the response

“A summary audit of medication safety incidents identified lapses in practice, competence and knowledge. In 2023 the ward medication safety audit, looking at all aspects of medication administration, scored between 76%-88%. A medication safety meeting was called in 2024 by the Head of Nursing, following review of medication safety and incidents involving medication across the Renal Haematology and Oncology directorate. Following this, significant training was put in place.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Revise annual surgical reviews for waiting-list patients, lower the age threshold to over 50, and develop partner-unit review-clinic agreements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) monitor short-term patient outcomes following organ transplantation through centre specific cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses. These are undertaken quarterly for kidney transplantation. These ‘within centre’ analyses enable prompt detection of any changes in failure and mortality rates, providing external assurance and enabling centres to compare current outcomes with their own past performance to assist in internal auditing of outcomes following organ transplant. Mr Loxston’s case was reviewed as part of these processes at a quality visit in 2025, and this has also supported us to learn from his death and ensure we implement changes to reduce the risk of poor outcomes for similar patients. In addition to the measures described above, we are revising our annual surgical review of all patients waiting on the national transplant waiting list.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 4 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Review reported incidents, provide feedback, and operate PSIRF-based divisional incident review and escalation processes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Matter 3: It is acknowledged that there was a lack of investigation and a lack of process in the management of medication safety incidents across the directorate. It is also acknowledged that there was a culture of under reporting incidents and, therefore, investigations that should have taken place did not. Since March 2024 the care group has seen a rise in incident reporting, especially near miss incidents. This is believed to be due to the changes in culture and education; incident reporting is widely welcomed by the senior team and all incidents are reviewed and fed back to the reporter.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 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

Relevant blood tests were reviewed, and hypoalbuminaemia was not considered an absolute contraindication to transplantation under applicable guidelines.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Matter 4: The common surgical practice at the time of the incident was to review blood tests relevant to fitness for acute transplantation. Other tests, although reviewed, were not considered as absolute contraindications to transplantation because it was the understanding that once the patient was on the active transplant waiting list, they were seeing a nephrologist and being monitored for general health and fitness.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 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

Shared electronic patient-record access cannot be extended to Brighton, so the revised information-handover pathway must be used instead.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Matter 6: There is a revised pathway that outlines the actions required when a kidney offer is received for transplant. This states that contact should be made with various teams, including the nephrologist at the base hospital. We have added multiple points along the pathway to ensure that communications are made appropriately and built in regular audit to provide assurance of the effectiveness of these processes (see appendix).”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 5 · response
Published 14 November 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.5

  1. 1

    Formalise a transplant quality-management system covering critical safety steps and regular audits and monitoring.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  2. 2

    Establish a monthly multidisciplinary Joint Renal Governance meeting focused on quality, risk, safety, and learning.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  3. 3

    Fully staff Champneys Ward and appoint new nursing leadership.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  4. 4

    Operate the ward accreditation programme and improve Champneys Ward’s quality performance.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 November 2025.
  5. 5

    Use ward quality audits to monitor care standards, address gaps, and support safe patient handling.

    Stated by St George’s, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals and Health GroupStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 November 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

Formalise a transplant quality-management system covering critical safety steps and regular audits and monitoring.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I thank you for providing this Prevention of Future Deaths report. The renal teams across gesh and the renal transplant team have taken on board all the issues that have been raised. A more robust quality management system for the transplant program is being formalised, looking at critical steps which can directly affect patient experience and outcomes and embedding a system of regular audits and monitoring to ensure these steps are adhered to.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 5 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Establish a monthly multidisciplinary Joint Renal Governance meeting focused on quality, risk, safety, and learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Historically, incidents have been discussed at the Renal Care Group meetings. It has been recognised that there was a need for a separate Joint Renal Governance meeting, where the full multidisciplinary team comes together to focus on quality, risks, patient safety and patient experience. This will start in January 2026 and run monthly. The Division has also fully implemented the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF) since July 2024 and, as part of this, a weekly Divisional Incident Review Group, chaired by the Clinical Chair, reviews incidents within each area and looks for themes and opportunities for learning and improvement. This allows much more flexibility to review and understand areas of concern and provides a robust governance and escalation process to support directorates and care groups to take action and ensure improvements are embedded.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Fully staff Champneys Ward and appoint new nursing leadership.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Champneys ward is a nineteen bedded, acute transplant ward. At the time of Mr Loxston’s admission there was a 25-31% vacancy within the nursing establishment, with turnover at almost 17%. Following a recruitment campaign, the nursing team is now fully substantiated, with a turnover of 0% for last 6 months, and has new leadership in place, with a new Head of Nursing and Matron appointed in 2024 and 2025 respectively.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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 the ward accreditation programme and improve Champneys Ward’s quality performance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust runs a ward accreditation programme; a Trust wide internal inspection team supports areas to align their services to Trust standards and CQC quality statements. The aim is to recognise good practice and improve areas that require attention, using a pre-agreed set of questions to assess quality metrics. Champneys ward was rated bronze in 2022, but the improvement work described has led to a gold rating being awarded in 2025. Medicines management is also reviewed as part of the accreditation assessment. In July 2023 the ward scored 83% in this domain. This has risen to 93% in 2025, aligning with the improvements seen in the ward-based quality observatory audits.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 14 November 2025

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

Use ward quality audits to monitor care standards, address gaps, and support safe patient handling.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of a quality improvement cycle, learning from incidents and patient feedback, the Head of Nursing and Matron are using audit to ensure that all quality metrics are met, and gaps are addressed immediately. Our quality observatory audit covers a range of areas, including manual handling risk assessments, pain scores, patient experience, pressure ulcer care and responsiveness to call bells. Staff are now 100% compliant with their manual handling training on the ward, and should a patient require moving with a fracture or disability, these needs are discussed daily as part of the multidisciplinary board rounds, with appropriate advice and guidance given for safe patient handling.”

Source location

Response from St George's University Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 14 November 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