PFD report

Yahya Muhammad Hayat · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 10 Feb 2025•Manchester South

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

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 raised1

  1. Lack of compulsory direct observed training for paediatric middle grades performing neonatal intubation
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate competence in neonatal resuscitationPart of recurring concern: Unreliable airway management during emergency carePart of recurring concern: Unsafe assurance of doctors' procedural competence
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.4

  1. Action

    Provide neonatal airway management training through Progress+ neonatology placements.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 February 2025.
  2. Action

    Strengthen the Progress+ curriculum's neonatal airway capabilities, emphasizing non-invasive airway management and specialty-level safe intubation and difficult-airway management.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 February 2025.
  3. Action

    Develop a neonatal airway safety standard with BAPM addressing skills maintenance and ongoing training.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 February 2025.

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

  1. Position

    Removing mandatory neonatal intubation DOPS does not necessarily increase risk because non-invasive airway management is safer and the former DOPS provided false reassurance.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthDisputes 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

Lack of compulsory direct observed training for paediatric middle grades performing neonatal intubation

Wider context from the report

“The court heard evidence of changes to paediatric specialist training that has removed the requirement that paediatric middle grades undergo compulsory direct observed training to be assessed as competent to perform neonatal intubation. The following matters of concern arise from this : (1) The fact training is no longer compulsory, increases the reliance on consultants ( who in some clinical settings may be non-resident on call depending when delivery takes place) ; and (2) Consultant general paediatricians of the future will have a lower level of experience than is currently the case of complex neonatal resuscitation ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate competence in neonatal resuscitation; Unreliable airway management during emergency care; Unsafe assurance of doctors' procedural competence.

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

Provide neonatal airway management training through Progress+ neonatology placements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Progress+ curriculum for paediatrics provides placements in neonatology between ST1-4, providing opportunities to develop knowledge and practical skills. Historically, training in safe airway management and intubation has taken place on neonatal placements and this will carry on during Progress+.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 1 · response
Published 14 February 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

Strengthen the Progress+ curriculum's neonatal airway capabilities, emphasizing non-invasive airway management and specialty-level safe intubation and difficult-airway management.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As noted in the report, with the introduction of the new Progress+ curriculum, the requirements for a mandatory successful DOPS (direct observation of procedural skills) for neonatal intubation has been removed, however key capabilities to manage a neonatal airway safely have been broadened and strengthened. This is in line with current evidence that in most cases a neonatal airway can be maintained more safely and reliably with non-invasive techniques, especially in inexperienced hands.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 1 · response
Published 14 February 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

Develop a neonatal airway safety standard with BAPM addressing skills maintenance and ongoing training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have also worked with the British Association of Perinatal Medicine, BAPM, to develop a neonatal airway safety standard that aligns with our curriculum. There is a very clear focus in this document on maintaining skills and ongoing training, and the document contains several resources (log books, multiprofessional simulations etc). to support professionals with the maintenance of skills. We will ensure we are signposting our members to this resource accordingly.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 2 · response
Published 14 February 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

Signpost members to the neonatal airway safety standard and its skills-maintenance resources.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have also worked with the British Association of Perinatal Medicine, BAPM, to develop a neonatal airway safety standard that aligns with our curriculum. There is a very clear focus in this document on maintaining skills and ongoing training, and the document contains several resources (log books, multiprofessional simulations etc). to support professionals with the maintenance of skills. We will ensure we are signposting our members to this resource accordingly.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 2 · response
Published 14 February 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

Removing mandatory neonatal intubation DOPS does not necessarily increase risk because non-invasive airway management is safer and the former DOPS provided false reassurance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“1. The fact training [specifically compulsory direct observed training to be assessed as competent to perform neonatal intubation] is no longer compulsory, increases the reliance on consultants (who in some clinical settings may be non-resident on call depending on when delivery takes place)”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 1 · response
Published 14 February 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

Operational delivery networks are responsible for supporting airway and resuscitation skill maintenance across neonatal units, particularly where skills are infrequently used.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We acknowledge that, as care of the sickest neonates is concentrated in Level 3 units and the need for intubation is overall reduced, this can result in less opportunity for training and for maintaining skills. This goes well beyond a single procedural capability in the training curriculum for early years trainees, especially in an era of a multiprofessional workforce and increasing numbers of locally-employed doctor staff, especially at more junior levels.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 2 · response
Published 14 February 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.2

  1. 1

    Share anonymised report information with the Clinical Quality in Practice Committee for discussion and identification of further actions.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 February 2025.
  2. 2

    Share information and local-improvement suggestions from the report with paediatric members through the patient safety portal.

    Stated by Royal College of Paediatrics and Child HealthStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 February 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 anonymised report information with the Clinical Quality in Practice Committee for discussion and identification of further actions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The College will be sharing information and suggestions for local improvement from your report with our paediatric members via its patient safety portal. The anonymised information within your report will also be shared for discussion with the RCPCH Clinical Quality in Practice Committee, where further actions may be identified.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 2 · response
Published 14 February 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 information and local-improvement suggestions from the report with paediatric members through the patient safety portal.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The College will be sharing information and suggestions for local improvement from your report with our paediatric members via its patient safety portal. The anonymised information within your report will also be shared for discussion with the RCPCH Clinical Quality in Practice Committee, where further actions may be identified.”

Source location

Response from RCPCH
Page 2 · response
Published 14 February 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