PFD report

Nola-Reign Morgan · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 24 Jun 2026•Gwent

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
9

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 9 recipients

Stated actions
0

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. Delays in transferring patients between antenatal and HDU wards
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes
  2. Failure to identify causes of transfer delays and take steps to avoid unnecessary delay recurring
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to ensure timely transfer to an appropriate hospital care environmentPart of recurring concern: Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes
  3. Insufficient training to enable obstetric and midwifery teams to identify the risk of chorioamnionitis and ensure adequate monitoring
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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

Delays in transferring patients between antenatal and HDU wards

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes.

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 identify causes of transfer delays and take steps to avoid unnecessary delay recurring

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure timely transfer to an appropriate hospital care environment; Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes.

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

Insufficient training to enable obstetric and midwifery teams to identify the risk of chorioamnionitis and ensure adequate monitoring

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

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 specific guidance for identifying and treating chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate guidance for managing fetal infection.

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 national antenatal guidance establishing when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used, especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

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 of local antenatal monitoring guidance to address chorioamnionitis, transfer times and consideration of continuous fetal monitoring

Wider context from the report

“1. National Guidance. There is no national guidance in the antenatal setting to establish when and in what circumstances fetal monitoring should be used especially when chorioamnionitis is suspected. Further there is no specific guidance that has been brought to my attention to identify and treat chorioamnionitis in pre-term mothers. Clear guidance exists for intrapartum fetal monitoring but in this case the grey area between Nola-Reign's mother being nearly but not in active labour meant that there was confusion as to whether continuous monitoring should or could have been put in place. 2. Health Board Antenatal Fetal Monitoring Guidance. Following Nola-Reign’s death the serious incident review recommended new guidance to address antenatal fetal monitoring. However, the new local guidance for antenatal monitoring does not reference chorioamnionitis, transfer times or the need to consider continuous fetal monitoring. 3. Training. There is insufficient evidence from the Health Board of the nature or degree of training that has taken place since Nola-Reign’s death to assist obstetric and midwifery teams to identifying the risk of chorioamnionitis and to ensure adequate monitoring is in place in particular: 4. Delay in transferring between Antenatal and HDU wards. The delay in transferring Nola-Reign's mother from antenatal ward to HDU was over 1 hour in a situation when acuity was not raised. This issue was not identified by the Serious Incident Review yet was a material factor in the period when Nola-Reign's mother remained unmonitored and no steps have been taken to identify causes for delay and to avoid unnecessary delay occurring in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report
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
0/9

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.